Skip to main content

Full text of "Advocate of peace"

See other formats





3| _==; 


Sianaa0 (Ettg 
fubltr ICtbrarg 

This Volume is for 

Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2007 with funding from 
t . IVIicrosoft Corporation 




January, 1928 

American Peace Society 

Its Beginnings 

At a meeting of the Maine Peace Society at Minot, Febru- 
ary 10, 1826, a motion was carried to form a national peace 
society. Minot was the home of William Ladd. The first 
constitution for a national peace society was drawn by this 
illustrious man, at the time corresponding secretary of the 
Massachusetts Peace Society. The constitution was pro- 
visionally adopted, with zdterations, February 18, 1828; but 
the society was finally and officially organized, through the 
influence of Mr. Ladd and with the aid of David Low Dodge, 
in New York City, May 8, 1828. Mr. Dodge wrote, in the 
minutes of the New York Peace Society: "The New York 
Peace Society resolved to be merged in the American Peace 
Society . . . which, in fact, was a dissolution of the old 
New York Peace Society, formed 16 August, 1815, and the 
American, May, 1828, was substituted in its place." 

Its Purpose 

The purpose of the American Peace Society shall be to 
promote permanent international peace through justice; and 
to advance in every proper way the general use of concilia- 
tion, arbitration, judicial methods, and other peaceful means 
of avoiding and adjusting differences among nations, to the 
end that right shall rule might in a law-governed world. 

— Constitution of the 
American Peace Society 
Article II. 




Arthur Deerix Call^ Editor 

Leo Pasvolsky, Associate Editor 

Published since 1834 by 


Pounded 1828 from Societies some of whicli hegsm in 1815. 

Suite 612-614 Colorado Building, Washington, D. C. 

(Cable address, "Ampax, Washington.") 


Sent free to all members of the American Peace Society. Separate subscription 
price, $3.00 a year. Single copies, 30 cents each. 

Entered as second-class matter. June 1, 1911, at the Post-Offlce at Washington, 
D. C. under the Act of July 16, 1894. Acceptance for mailing at special rate of postage 
provided for in Section 1103, Act of October 3, 1917 ; authorized August 10, 1918. 

It being impracticable to express in these columns the divergent views of 
the thousands of members of the American Peace Society, full responsibility 
for the utterances of this magazine is assumed by the Editor. 


The American Peace Society, Some Facts 3 

The Foundations of Peace Bettween Nations 4 


Nature of the Centennial Celebration — The Celebration in Maine — The 
Gentle Critic — Four Corners of Our Congressional New Year — ■ 
We Must Know — German Policy Relative to Further Borrow- 
ings — Nicholas Titulescu — The Britten Metric Bill — Editorial 
Notes 5-19 

World Problems in Review 

New Cabinet in Albania — Currency Stabilization in Poland — Great 
Britain and the Origins of the War — French Foreign Policy — Five 
Years of Fascism — The Soviet Army — Reorganization of the 
Belgian Cabinet — Russia and Disarmament — Polish-Lithuanian 
Conflict 20-38 

A Symposium of New Year Views 39 

General AlRticles 

Dr. Ellery's "The Saving Truth" 42 

Reviewed by Etna McCormick 
Woman's War for Peace 44 

By Lady Astor, M. P. 
Abreast the New Year , 46 

Four Quotations 

Three Theories of the Binding Force of Treaties 47 

By Theodore E. Burton 

Inte3$national Documents 

The United States Opposed to International Codes 58 

Russo-Persian Guarantee Pact, 59 

News in Brihif 61 

Book Reviews .' 62 

Vol. 90 January, 1928 No. 1 
S -T 



Theodoee E. Burton 


David Jayne Hill 

Abthxtb Deebin Call 

Jackson H. Ralston 

Gbobge W. White 

Business Manager 

Lacey C. Zapf 


Assistant Director, Bureau of Research, Chamber of Commerce of the United States 

Secretary, American Section, International Chamber of Commerce 


(Asterisk indicates member of Executive Committee) 

•Theodore E. Burton, President. Congressman 
from Ohio. President, American Group, Interparlia- 
mentary Union. Member House Committee on Foreign 
Affairs. Member United States Debt Funding Com- 

Philip Marshall Brown, Professor of Interna- 
tional Law, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jer- 

•Arthde Deerin Call, Secretary, and Editor of 
the Advocate of Peace. Executive Secretary, Amer- 
ican Group, Interparliamentary Union. 

P. P. Claxton, Superintendent of Schools, Tulsa, 
Oklahoma. Formerly United States Commissioner of 

John M. Crawford, President, Parkersburg Rig & 
Reel Company, Parkersburg, West Virginia. For 
many years a Director of the Chamber of Commerce 
of the United States. 

Tyson S. Dinks, Attorney of Denver, Colorado. 

John J. Esch, Chairman, Interstate Commerce 
Commission. Formerly Member of Congress from 

Harry A. Gaefield, President, Williams College, 
Williamstown, Mass. United States Fuel Adminis- 
trator during World War. 

•Thomas E. Green, Director, National Speakers' 
Bureau, American Red Cross. 

Dwight B. Heard, President, Dwight B. Heard 
Investment Company, Phoenix, Arizona. Director, 
Chamber of Commerce of the United States. 

•David Jaynb Hill, Washington, D. C. Formerly 
Assistant Secretary of State and Ambassador to 

Clarence H. Howard, President, Commonwealth 
Steel Company, St. Louis, Missouri. For many years 
a Director, Chamber of Commerce of the United States, 
and member of American Committee, International 
Chamber of Commerce. 

Charles L. Hyde, President, American Exchange 
Bank, Pierre, South Dakota. 

William Mather Lewis, President, Lafayette 
College, Easton, Pa. 

Felix M. McWhirter, President, Peoples State 
Bank, Indianapolis, Indiana. Director, Chamber of 
Commerce of the United States. 

E. T. Meredith, Des Moines, Iowa. Director, 
Chamber of Commerce of the United States. Member 
American Committee, International Chamber of Com- 
merce. Formerly Secretary of Agriculture. 

Frank W. Mondell, Washington, D. C. Formerly 
Congressman from Wyoming. 

•Walter A. Morgan, D. D., Pastor, New First Con- 
gregational Church, Chicago, Illinois. 

♦George M. Morris, Washington, D. C. Partner of 
the Chicago and New York law firm of KixMiller & 

•Henry C. Morris, Attorney of Chicago and Wash- 
ington, D. C. Formerly United States Consul. 

Edwin P. Morrow, Member, United States Board 
of Mediation, Washington, D. C. Formerly Governor 
of Kentucky. 

John M. Parker, formerly Governor of Louisiana, 
St. Francisville, La. ^ . 

Reginald H. Parsons, President, Parsons Invest- 
ment Company, Seattle, Washington. Member Amer- 
ican Committee, International Chamber of Commerce, 
and for many years member of the National Foreign 
Trade Council. ^,^ ^ ,,, 

Jackson H. Ralston, Attorney, Palo Alto, Califor- 

Arthur Ramsay, Southern Pines, North Carolina. 
Founder, Fairmont Seminary, Washington, D. C. 

Hiram W. Ricker, President, Poland Springs Com- 
pany, South Poland, Maine. 

•Theodore Stanfibld, Peace Advocate and Author, 
New York City. Formerly Executive Manager, Amer- 
ican Metal Company. 

•Jay T. Stocking, D. D., Pastor, Pilgrim Congre- 
gational Church, St. Louis, Mo. 

Silas H. Steawn, Attorney of Chicago. Chairman 
of Board, Montgomery Ward Company. Director, In- 
ternational Chamber of Commerce. President, Ameri- 
can Bar Association. 

•Henry W. Temple, Congressman from Pennsyl- 
vania. Member House Committee on Foreign Affairs. 

Robert E. Vinson, President, Western Reserve 
University, Cleveland, Ohio. 

William Way, D. D., Rector Grace Episcopal 
Church, Charleston, South Carolina. President of the 
New England Society of Charleston. 

Oscar Wells, President, First National Bank, Bir- 
mingham, Alabama. Formerly President, American 
Bankers Association. Member American Committee, 
International Chamber of Commerce. 

Frank White, Treasurer of the United States, 
Washington, D. C. Formerly Governor of North 

•George W. White, Treasurer. President, National 
Metropolitan Bank, Washington, D. C. Treasurer 
American Automobile Association. 

William Allen White, Proprietor and Editor, 
Emporia Daily and Weekly Gazette, Emporia, Eans. 


Elmer Ellsworth Brown, Chancellor, New York 

W. H. P, Fadnce, President, Brown University. 

William P. Gest, President, Fidelity Trust Com- 
pany, Philadelphia, Pa. 

Charlbs Cheney Hyde, Hamilton Fish Professor 
of International Law and Diplomacy, Columbia Uni- 
versity. Formerly Solicitor for Department_of State, 

George H. Jddd, President, Judd & Detweiler, Inc., 
Washington, D. C. 

Elihd Root, Attorney, New York City. Formerly 
Secretary of State, and for many years President of 
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 

James Brown Scott, Secretary Carnegie Endow- 
ment for International Peace, Washington, D. C. 
President, Institute of International Law. 

Charles F. Thwinq, President Emeritus, Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Otxio. 



It is a nonpartisan, nonsectarian, and 
nonprofit-making organization, free from 
motives of private gain. 

It is a corporation under the laws of 
Massachusetts, organized in 1838 by Wil- 
liam Ladd, of Maine, aided by David Low 
Dodge, of New York. 

Its century of usefulness will be fittingly 
celebrated in Cleveland, Ohio, and 
throughout the State of Maine, during 
the early days of May, 1928. The Cen- 
tury Celebration will be the background 
for an international gathering of leading 
men and women from all parts of the 

The American Peace Society is the first 
of its kind in the United States. Its pur- 
pose is to prevent the injustices of war by 
extending the methods of law and order 
among the nations, and to educate the 
peoples everywhere in what an ancient 
Eoman lawgiver once called "the con- 
stant and unchanging will to give to every 
one his due." 

It is built on justice, fair play, and law. 
It has spent its men and its resources in 
arousing the thoughts and the consciences 
of statesmen to the ways which are better 
than war, and of men and women every- 
where to the gifts which America can 
bring to the altar of a law-governed world. 

The first society to espouse the cause 
of international peace on the continent of 
Europe was organized at the instigation 
of this Society. 

The International Peace conferences 
originated at the headquarters of the- 
American Peace Society in 1843. 

The International Law Association re- 
sulted from an extended European tour 
of Dr. James D. Miles, this Society's Sec- 
retary, in 1873. 

Since 1889 it has worked to influence 
State legislatures and the United States 
Congress in behalf of an International 
Congress and Court of Nations. 

It has constantly worked for arbitration 
treaties and a law-governed world. 

In 1871 it organized the great peace 
jubilees throughout the country. 

The Secretary of the Society was se- 
lected by the Columbian Exposition au- 
thorities to organize the Fifth Universal 

Peace Congress, which was held in Chi- 
cago in 1893. 

This Society, through a committee, or- 
ganized the Thirteenth Universal Peace 
Congress, which was held in Boston in 

The Pan American Congress, out of 
which grew the International Bureau of 
American Republics — now the Pan Amer- 
ican Union — was authorized after nu- 
merous petitions had been presented to 
Congress by this Society. 

The Secretary of this Society has been 
chosen annually a member of the Council 
of the International Peace Bureau at 
Geneva since the second year of the Bu- 
reau's existence, 1892. 

It initiated the following American 
Peace Congresses: In New York, 1907; in 
Chicago, 1909 ; in Baltimore, 1911 ; in St. 
Louis, 1913 ; in San Francisco, 1915. 

It has published a magazine regularly 
since 1828. Its Advocate of Peace ia 
the oldest, largest, and most widely cir- 
culated peace magazine in the world. 

It strives to work with our Government 
and to protect the principles at the basis 
of our institutions. 

In our ungoverned world of wholly in- 
dependent national units it stands for 
adequate national defense. 

It believes that the rational way to dis- 
armament is to begin by disarming poli- 

The claim of the American Peace So- 
ciety upon every loyal American citizen is 
that of an organization which has been 
one of the greatest forces for right think- 
ing in the United States for nearly a cen- 
tury; which is today the defender of true 
American ideals and principles. 

It is supported entirely by the free and 
generous gifts, large and small, of loyal 
Americans who wish to have a part in 
this important work. 


The classes of membership and dues are : 
Annual Membership, $5 ; Sustaining Mem- 
bership, $10; Contributing Membership, 
$25; Institutional Membership, $25; Life 
Membership $100. 

All memberships include a full subscrip- 
tion to the monthly magazine of the So- 
ciety, the Advocate of Peace. 


Adopted by the American Peace Society, November 30, 1925 

The American Peace Society reaffirms, at 
this its ninety-seventh annual meeting, its 
abiding faith in the precepts of its illustrious 
founders. These founders, together with 
the men of later times who have shared in 
the labors of this Society, are favorably 
known because of their services to the build- 
ing and preservation of the Republic. Their 
work for peace between nations must not 
be forgotten. 

Largely because of their labors, the pur- 
poses of the American Peace Society have 
become more and more the will of the world, 
and opponents of the war system of settling 
International disputes have reason for a 
larger hope and a newer courage. 

At such a time as this, with its rapidly de- 
reloping international achievements, it is fit- 
ting that the American Peace Society should 
restate its precepts of a century in the light 
of the ever-approaching tomorrow. 

Peace between nations, demanded by every 
legitimate interest, can rest securely and 
permanently only on the principles of jus- 
tice as interpreted in terms of mutually ac- 
cepted International law ; but justice between 
nations and its expression in the law are pos- 
sible only as the collective intelligence and 
the common faith of peoples approve and de- 

The American Peace Society Is not unmind- 
ful of the work of the schools, of the 
churches, of the many organizations through- 
out the world aiming to advance Interest 
and wisdom in the matters of a desirable 
and attainable peace; but this desirable, at- 
tainable, and hopeful peace between nations 
must rest upon the commonly accepted 
achievements in the settlement of interna- 
tional disputes. 

These achievements, approved in every In- 
stance by the American Peace Society, and 
In which some of its most distinguished mem- 
bers have participated, have heretofore 
been — 

By direct negotiations between free, sov- 
ereign, and independent States, working 
through official representatives, diplomatic or 
consular agents — a work now widely ex- 
tended by the League of Nations at Geneva; 

By the good offices of one or more friendly 

nations, upon the request of the contending 
parties or of other and disinterested parties — 
a policy consistently and persistently urged 
by. the United States; 

By the mediation of one or more nations 
upon their own or other initiative — likewise 
a favorite policy of the United States; 

By commissions of inquiry, duly provided 
for by international convention and many ex- 
isting treaties, to which the Government of 
the United States Is pre-eminently a con- 
tracting party; 

By councils of conciliation — a method of 
adjustment fortunately meeting with the ap- 
proval of leading nations, Including the 
United States; 

By friendly comi)08ition, in which nations 
in controversy accept, in lieu of their own, 
the opinion of an upright and disinterested 
third party — a method tried and not found 
wanting by the Government of the United 
States ; 

By arbitration, in which controversies are 
adjusted upon the basis of respect for law — 
a method brought into modern and general 
practice by the English-speaking peoples. 

All of these processes will be continued, 
emphasized, and improved. While justice 
and the rules of law — principles, customs, 
practices recognized as applicable to nations 
in their relations with one another — fre- 
quently apply to each of these methods just 
enumerated, there remain two outstanding, 
continuous, and pressing demands : 

(1) Recurring, preferably iieriodic, confer- 
ences of duly appointed delegates, acting 
imder instruction, for the purpose of restat- 
ing, amending, reconciling, declaring, and 
progressively codifying those rules of interna- 
tional law shown to be necessary or useful 
to the best interests of civilized States — a 
proposal repeatedly made by enlightened 
leaders of thought in the United States. 

(2) Adherence of all States to a Perma- 
nent Court of International Justice mutually 
acceptable, sustained, and made use of for 
the determination of controversies between 
nations, involving legal rights — an Institu- 
tion due to the initiative of the United States 
and based upon the experience and practice 
of the American Supreme Court. 




January, 1928 




THE spirit of the celebration of the 
one-hundredth anniversary of the 
American Peace Society, May 7-11 next, 
clearly appears in the invitation which 
the Society is preparing to extend to all 
of its members. That invitation will urge 
that the members of the American Peace 
Society, after carefullest consideration, 
in conference assembled, lay before the 
Board of Directors their best views as 
to the aims and methods of the Society, 
now and for the immediate future. It is 
in this spirit that the program of the com- 
ing celebration is being developed. 

That proper opportunity may be offered 
and results achieved, it is now clear that 
the Conference will have to consist of three 
major divisions, having to do with the 
general public, with special Commissions, 
and with the one hundredth annual meet- 
ing of the Board of Directors of the Amer- 
ican Peace Society. 

The public will be admitted to the gen- 
eral sessions as far as the seating capacity 

The Commissions will be six in number, 
each with conferences dealing with the fol- 
lowing aspects of human endeavor, repre- 
senting a rather inclusive transection of 
public opinion: First, there will be a 
series of Commission Conferences, devoted 
to the international implications of In- 
dustry, to which delegates will be invited 
from trade bodies, manufacturers, labor 
groups, bankers' associations, and kindred 

organizations. Second, another on Inter- 
national Justice, to which delegates will 
be invited from the legislative, the execu- 
tive, and judicial departments of the 
government, from bar associations, inter- 
national law societies, teachers of inter- 
national law, and the like. Third, another 
on Methods of Settling International Dis- 
putes — past, present, and future — to 
which delegates will be invited from peace 
and patriotic organizations. Fourth, an- 
other on Education, to which delegates 
will be invited from schools, colleges, uni- 
versities, learned societies, and the press. 
Fifth, another on Religion, to which dele- 
gates will be invited from the churches 
and other religious groups. Sixth, an- 
other on Social Agencies, with delegates 
from the various groups of social workers, 
such as specialize in the social sciences, the 
American Association of Social Workers, 
charities, libraries, and parent-teachers' 
associations. Interest already shown in 
the coming Centennial clearly indicates 
that the invitation from the Centennial 
Celebration Committee will be generously 
accepted from a large number of these 

There will be the annual meeting, 
through a number of sessions, of the 
Board of Directors of the American Peace 
Society. At this meeting the Board will 
receive the annual reports of the officers, 
the recoromendations of the conference, 
and take such action upon these reports, 
recommendations, or other matters as the 
Board may see fit. The Board of Di- 



rectors, under the Society's Constitution, 
is the only body capable of speaking for 
the American Peace Society. 

OflBcial delegates shall be the duly ac- 
credited members of the American Peace 
Society. As such they will have the 
privilege of the floor and the right to vote 
in the commissions and in the general 

Associate delegates will have the privi- 
lege of attending the commissions and the 
general sessions and, where agreeable to 
the oflScial delegates, of participating in 
the discussions. 

All delegates, official or associate, wiU 
have the right to reserved seats in all ses- 
sions of the conference, commission or 

It has already been found necessary to 
adopt the plan of sending out tickets, 
which the various delegates will have to 
exchange for reserved seats at all sessions 
to be held in the Public Auditorium. Of 
course, all members of the American 
Peace Society will be given an oppor- 
tunity to obtain, as official delegates, re- 
served seats before the invitations go out 
to the general public. Arrangements, un- 
der the rules of the railroads, have been 
made for a special passenger rate of one 
and one-half fare for the round trip to 
Cleveland for all delegates. In order that 
these efforts to meet the wishes of the 
members of the Society may be effective, it 
will be necessary, however, that all pros- 
pective delegates notify the officers, with 
headquarters at the Hotel Cleveland, 
Cleveland, Ohio, of their plans at the 
earliest possible moment, certainly not 
later than March 1st next. After that 
date it is probable that all members of the 
Society will be on the same basis as non- 
members, so far as seating privileges and 
other rights are concerned. In the mean- 
time, the officials are reserving the largest 
possible block of seats for the members of 
the Society. 

The management is pleased to announce 
that Dr. James Brown Scott, former so- 
licitor of our Department of State and 
former President of the Institute of In- 
ternational Law, well-known authority on 
international matters, has accepted the 
chairmanship of the Program Committee. 

Thus, it will appear, the Cleveland cele- 
bration in honor of the one-hundredth 
anniversary of the American Peace So- 
ciety is to be an event of importance. It 
is the first opportunity offered since the 
war for the members and other friends of 
the American Peace Society to meet, to 
discuss, and to aid the Society in its de- 
sire to profit by counsel, to revise, to en- 
large, and to improve its service as an 
effective agency for the promotion of a 
world order, better in the coming century 
than has been possible through the hun- 
dred years now past. 


PEOPLE interested in the American 
Peace Society will not need to be re- 
minded that the Legislature of the State 
of Maine unanimously voted last March a 
joint resolution heartily endorsing the 
efforts of the American Peace Society to 
recall and honor the memory and services 
of William Ladd, the founder of this So- 
ciety. In this resolution the Legislature 
requested the Governor of the State to 
express to the American Peace Society 
the appreciation of the people of Maine 
for its purpose thus to honor its former 
illustrious citizen, and to do what he may 
consider lawfully proper to aid such ef- 
forts. The resolution also requested the 
Governor to appoint a committee to aid 
in such a commemoration, and provided 
that the American Peace Society be in- 
vited to hold its Centennial exercises in 
whole or in part in the State of Maine; 
and, finally, that the resolution itself be 
given the widest publicity, "to the end 



that the interest and support of every 
loyal citizen of Maine, especially of her 
boys and girls, may be enlisted in this 
most worthy memorial celebration." 

Under date of December 13, Governor 
Ealph 0. Brewster wrote to the Secretary 
of this Society the following letter: 

"In accordance with the resolution of 
the Eighty-third Legislature of the State 
of Maine, and in compliance with the 
unanimous desire of the committee in 
charge of the Sesquicentennial of the birth 
of Wilham Ladd, it is a pleasure to ex- 
tend to the American Peace Society a 
most cordial invitation to participate, to 
such extent as they may find convenient 
and advisable, in the exercises which it is 
planned to carry out in the State of 
Maine this coming spring in recognition 
of the distinguished services of William 
Ladd to the cause of peace. 

"Maine is gradually awakening to the 
shadow of the very great man who lived so 
lonor within our midst. 

"Will you please advise us at your con- 
venience as to how far your organization 
may be able to participate in this event, 
together with any suggestions you may 
have as to the manner in which this ob- 
servance may profitably be carried out." 

Of course, this invitation will be ac- 
cepted in all its fullness. A great State 
celebrating the one hundred and fiftieth 
anniversary of the birth of one of its great 
men and the one hundredth anniversary 
of the Society which he founded is a fine 
object lesson in the idealisms at the heart 
of every people. The celebration by such 
a State of the one hundred and fiftieth 
anniversary of the birth of William Ladd 
and of the hundredth anniversary of 
the American Peace Society, which he 
founded, will mark an epoch not only in 
the history of the American Peace 
Society, but of the peace movement 
throughout the world. It, like the great 
gathering planned for Cleveland, Ohio, 
cannot but affect with a potent whole- 
someness the views and feelings of men 

and women not only in this country but 

The success of the celebration through- 
out the State of Maine is already assured 
by the fact that President Kenneth 
Charles Morton Sills, of Bowdoin College, 
which through the century has contributed 
conspicuously to the development of the 
American Peace Society, is chairman of 
the Celebration Committee. Others, also 
already appointed by the Governor to 
serve upon this committee, are President 
Harold S. Boardman, of the University 
of Maine; President Clifton B. Gray, of 
Bates College; Dr. Augustus 0. Thomas, 
State Commissioner of Education, and 
Mr. Hiram W. Ricker, all of whom have 
accepted their appointments. 

It is interesting to note that these 
people of Maine are planning not only to 
celebrate the memory of William Ladd; 
they are proposing to emphasize that par- 
ticular portion of Mr. Ladd's services that 
relate to the development of Pan-Ameri- 
canism. In the light of Mr. Ladd's well- 
known interest in the attempt of Bolivar 
to organize in 1826, at Panama, a confer- 
ence of American States, the first effort of 
its kind ; in the light, further, of the near- 
ness of Canada to the State of Maine, and 
in the light also of the great labors of 
other distinguished men of Maine, par- 
ticularly of James G. Blaine, in the 
interest of a greater international under- 
standing among the States of the West- 
ern Hemisphere, this aspect of the cele- 
bration in Maine will be peculiarly 
appropriate. Incidentally, it should not 
be overlooked, the Maine celebration will 
be held early in June, at a time when the 
glories of that State are at their best. 

The people of Maine know with Mat- 
thew Arnold that "Greatness is a spiritual 
condition worthy to excite love, interest, 
and admiration," and that it was great- 
ness of that kind which marked the life of 
William Ladd. 




AT THIS the beginning of another year, 
■l\. especially as it contemplates the 
American Peace Society about to celebrate 
its one-hundredth anniversary, the Ad- 
vocate OF Peace wishes it might lay the 
whole case of the Society before the peo- 
ple of the world. It is convinced that if 
that could be done the Society would have 
the universal support of men and women, 
with perhaps just enough opposition to 
keep it respectably humble. Two difficul- 
ties seem to lie in the way of this con- 
summation. One is that there are a few 
imfortunate people who do not read the 
Advocate of Peace. Another, difficult 
for the Editor to appreciate, is that some 
who read it do not seem to understand it. 

The position of the American Peace 
Society, the only program of the Society, 
is set forth regularly in the Advocate of 
Peace, under the heading "The Founda- 
tions of Peace between Nations," adopted 
by the American Peace Society November 
30, 1925. Everything else in the Advo- 
cate of Peace is simply the effort of the 
Editor to advertise these "Foundations" 
and to measure by them the major happen- 
ings of our world. That he may not em- 
barrass the Society overmuch, he has an- 
nounced faithfully every month since our 
country entered the World War that he 
accepts full responsibility in this business. 

Since criticisms against the American 
Peace Society are seldom addressed to the 
Society's official platform, as set forth in 
the "Foundations," the Editor sometimes 
strongly suspects that few ever read even 
that document. He is strengthened in this 
view by a letter received from Kev. "Walter 
Amos Morgan, D. D., pastor of the New 
First Congregational Church, Chicago, 
Illinois, a Director of the American Peace 
Society and a member of its Executive 
Committee. Among other things. Dr. 
Morgan says : 

"I am of the opinion that we need a 
simpler statement concerning the program 
of the American Peace Society than that 
which is printed monthly in the Advocate 
OF Peace. I took pains while in Wash- 
ington to talk with a number of people 
who took the Advocate of Peace and ask 
them about the program of the American 
Peace Society as set forth in that publica- 
tion. Invariably they were ignorant of it. 

"I am wondering if we could not put 
somewhere regularly the statement of a 
twofold fact: first, that the American 
Peace Society theoretically is opposed to 
all war, and that it works for an organized 
world based upon laws to be interpreted 
by a properly constituted court; that The 
Hague conferences are American in their 
genius and sound in principle. In the ex- 
perience of America with forty-eight sov- 
ereignties under one government without 
the ultimate authority of force, we have a 
method to present to the world. In the 
second place, I would say that we ought to 
state very clearly that in matters of crises 
the American Peace Society wiU use its 
judgment as to the next practical step to 
be taken toward the ultimate realization 
of our goal. The goal never can be 
achieved at one great leap, and we can 
only take steps toward it. The laying 
down of a method of procedure to help us 
arrive at the goal before the concrete 
crisis arises probably woidd get us into 
trouble in the long run. But we must 
(1) keep before us the ideal and (2) use 
judgment as to the next step to be taken, 
which has meant, and may mean again, 

"As to what ought to be accomplished 
at Cleveland, I find myself a bit up in the 
air, not being very close to the situation. 
Being a man, however, I am willing to 
venture a suggestion. 

"In my judgment, one of the things 
needed most in the peace movement in 
America and in the world, too, is an at- 
tempt to unify the forces working toward 
the same goal. If it could be possible at 
the meeting in Cleveland to arrive at two 
or three simple conclusions that could be 
heralded as the conclusions of the men 
present and of the American Peace So- 
ciety, probably we could get the attention 
of interested men more readily than we 
can now. I know a number of peace work- 




ers here in Chicago. My judgment is they 
are mostly 'nuts/ One or two of them 
pester the life out of me. I am sorry to 
say the average citizen thinks that all of 
us who believe in a warless world are 

"Perhaps it is expecting too much to 
correct that opinion, but I do feel that the 
movement needs (1) simplifying; (2) 
unifying; (3) energizing. 

"You have my prayers, my dear fellow, 
that you may be able to bring something 
out of the Cleveland meeting. I only wish 
I was able to do more to help you." 

Among that type of letters most damp- 
ening to editorial ambition, the Editor 
selects this from Prof. Emily G. Balch, 
prominently associated with the Women's 
International League for Peace and Free- 
dom. Professor Balch writes under date 
of November 20 : 

"I am extremely sorry to say that I do 
not find myself in such sympathy with the 
American Peace Society as to desire to 
help sustain it. 

"Its attitude as shown in its editorial, 
Back-Seat Driving, last year distressed me. 
I think the whole-hearted desire of this 
country for arbitration instead of inter- 
vention in Mexico, as shown last January, 
was an enormous strengthening of Presi- 
dent Coolidge's very real peace policy. 
And there have been other matters in 
which I felt the American Peace Society, 
which ought to be a wise leader, was not 
such. I meet this same feeling as to the 
Advocate of Peace among people of 
nation-wide reputation. 

"I shall be interested to see the discus- 
sion in the Advocate or Peace of Sena- 
tor Burton's proposal in regard to refusing 
shipment of munitions to an aggressive 
nation. I am very happy over this initia- 
tive of the chairman of the American 
Peace Society." 

The interesting thing about this letter 
is that the particular editorial of last 
year to which the distinguished professor 
refers happens to be the one editorial that 
has received the widest commendation of 
any editorial the magazine has run for 
many a year. Indeed, it was read and com- 

mended both in the Senate and the House 
of Representatives and appeared twice in 
the Congressional Record. Any poor edi- 
tor would be pardoned for slipping in a 
fact like that. As for the "people of 
nation-wide reputation," it might be re- 
plied that among the supporters of the 
American Peace Society are a few "people 
of nation-wide reputation" — more, in fact, 
than at any time in its honorable history. 
The Editor still dares to hope that among 
these will soon reappear Miss Emily Balch. 
Still another type of criticism, more 
difficult to answer, is set forth in a letter, 
under date of December 12, from the dis- 
tinguished Professor in Columbia Uni- 
versity, the acting President of the New 
York Peace Society, Dr. John Bates Clark. 
Since Dr. Clark says that he would like to 
feel at liberty to give publicity to his letter 
and to our reply, we are here glad to aid 
him in that respect. Dr. Clark says (the 
paragraph numbers are ours) : 

(1) "The invitation of the American 
Peace Society to attend its Centennial 
Jubilee has been received. The current 
issue of the Advocate of Peace contains 
an article by Mr. David Jayne Hill criti- 
cising Monsieur Briand's proposal for 
'outlawing war' between France and 
America. The criticism is based on the 
inalienable right of Congress to declare 
war. The issue contains also an editorial 
which arraigns the League of Nations for 
dilatoriness in supporting the effort to 
codify international law, though it admits 
that in this respect the League is 'begin- 
ning to see the light;' the italics are ours. 
Of its covenant it says: 'The instrument, 
so far as we are able to understand it, is 
an attempt to set up an international or- 
ganization opposed to the principles of 
international law.' Efforts to disarm are 
unsuccessful when nations are not assured 
of safety after disarming. Plans sug- 
gested for affording such security are 
called, in your publication, futile, and the 
only course of action that is pronounced 
sane is developing international law. The 
distinguished foreign statesmen whose 
biographies are sketched in the Advocate. 




and who may be about to honor by their 
presence the jubilee of the American Peace 
Society, should certainly have before them 
these frank expressions of the attitude of 
that Society toward the League and its 

(2) "There are three different ques- 
tions at issue concerning the League of 
Nations. One of them is whether our 
country should or should not become a 
member of the League. Another is 
whether, while remaining outside of that 
organization, it should or should not 
effectively co-operate in its efforts to pre- 
vent war. The third is whether the 
League itself is or is not doing fruitful 
work; whether the sum total of its many 
activities is or is not an influence favorable 
to peace and to human welfare. Only on 
the supposition that it is not so can it 
possibly be right to take either a hostile 
or a contemptuous attitude toward it. At 
the worst, it is a union of most of the 
world for preventing future Armageddons, 
and discrediting it would be working for 

(3) "It is impossible to claim with an 
iota of reason that the efforts of the 
League of Nations have been fruitless. 
It is an almost equally unreasoning posi- 
tion which would ignore the profound in- 
terest that our own country has in its 
further success. Its activities safeguard 
our own vital interest, and a systematic 
effort to thwart them would place among 
the enemies of human welfare the man 
or the organization making such an effort. 
We are reluctant to place the American 
Peace Society in that position, and till 
recently it has not been so. We rejoice in 
the further fact that there is nearly a half 
year before its Centennial Celebration 
will occur, and that by word and by action 
within that time its position may be made 

(4) "The question of world disarma- 
ment affords one practical test. As Lord 
Cecil has recently said, nations shrink 
from disarming unless their security is in 
some way guaranteed. The League of 
Nations has undertaken to give protection 
against aggressive war and will give it if 
its course has moral support. Disarming 
may then be a safe measure. Does the 
American Peace Society think that this 
can be accomplished by any other agency 

than the League of Nations? Will the 
mere codifying of international law do it ? 
If not, should the world forego more di- 
rect efforts to keep the peace because there 
are difficulties to be surmounted in do- 
ing it? 

(5) "The honored President of the 
American Peace Society has introduced in 
the House of Kepresentatives a bill that, 
if enacted, will prevent the sending of 
arms or war supplies from America to any 
country that is making an aggressive war. 
Doubtless the Peace Society will advo- 
cate this measure. It is in order to say, 
in this connection, that Article 16 of the 
League's Covenant will unite all nations 
that accept that covenant in a similar 
course of action. It will align most of 
the world in effective opposition to wars 
of aggression. 

(6) "If you are right in thinking that 
the Covenant of the League is *an at- 
tempt to set up an international organi- 
zation contrary to the principles of inter- 
national law,' it must be on the ground 
that that law permits aggressive war. 
The sacred right to attack an unoffending 
State must be the one that Mr. Hill's 
argimient contends for, since no other 
right is affected by the measure referred 
to. No one for a moment thinks of re- 
nouncing the right of a people to defend 
their country when it is attacked. 

(7) "A mode of distinguishing offense 
from defense is indispensable, and there 
is good reason to hope that a clear and 
workable distinction may in time be ac- 
cepted by the League of Nations and con- 
firmed by necessary treaties. It will then 
become an established feature of interna- 
tional law, thanks to the League of 

(8) "The supreme problem now at 
issue is that of another Armageddon. If 
eminent international lawyers formulate 
the laws of nations as they stand, will the 
laws of themselves prevent the catas- 
trophe? If high authorities suggest an 
amendment or an addition to the code, 
who can adopt it and make it effective 
except the nations themselves, and what 
power but the League of Nations is avail- 
able for securing such united action? 

(9) "A sailor on a ship has exceptional 
facilities for scuttling it, and a pilot at 
the wheel has exceptional power to run 




it on the rocks. A peace society that turns 
against its cause can damage it in a short 
time more than it can advance it in a 
long time. Will the coming celebration be 
devoted solely to the codifying of inter- 
national law? Will it belittle other aims 
and efforts of the League of Nations? 
Will it favor a policy of aloofness from it 
so thorough-going that it will call for dis- 
paraging it in its present sphere of ac- 
tivity? We, and doubtless many other 
organizations that are deeply interested in 
efforts to avoid another Armageddon, 
would value information on these points." 

Taking up seriatim the major points of 
Dr. Clark^s letter as he understands them, 
the Editor begs leave to say that the 
editorial to which the Doctor refers was 
an attempt to congratulate the League of 
Nations upon its decision to call at The 
Hague a conference of all the nations in 
the interest of international law, showing 
thus a return to that fundamental prin- 
ciple of the Covenant of the League as 
set forth in its preliminary statement in 
behalf of "the firm establishment of the 
understandings of international law as the 
actual rule of conduct among govern- 
ments." The Editor finds it difficult to 
believe that the friends of the League will 
wish to object to that. 

As to the three questions set forth by 
Dr. Clark in the second paragraph, the 
Editor is glad to reply categorically: 
First, he does not believe that the question 
whether or not the United States should 
become a member of the League of Na- 
tions is at this time of practical import- 
ance. Second, he believes that the United 
States will be glad to co-operate with the 
League in every practical manner, in the 
future as in the past. Third, he believes 
that no person could possibly deny that 
the League is doing hopeful work, and 
that to "take either a hostile or contemp- 
tuous attitude toward it" would be quite 
unjust. Of course, the friends of the 
League welcome every honest criticism. 

for they know that they are often breast- 
ing an unchartered sea. In the light of 
what he has said, the Editor does not un- 
derstand that paragraph 3 of Dr. Clark's 
letter requires further reply. 

Paragraph 4 relates to the problem of 
disarmament. The Editor does not be- 
lieve that the United States will enter into 
any alliance to guarantee the security of 
any nation or group of nations. He be- 
lieves that all such alliances are more 
of the nature of war than of peace. He 
believes that security stands a better 
chance by the gradual disarmament of 
policy than by trying first to whittle off 
here and there a fighting machine. He 
believes, therefore, more in the ways set 
forth in the American Peace Society's 
"Foundation of Peace Between Nations" 
as the bases of any enduring security be- 
tween nations than in the variety of pro- 
posals now current in Europe, plans based 
upon the rather ancient and exploded, 
not to say explosive, theories of alliances, 
ententes, balances of power, and the coer- 
cion of arms. He believes that the hope 
for any adequate reduction of interna- 
tional armaments must begin with inter- 
national conferences of all the nations in 
behalf of those agencies of justice essential 
to abiding national interests and to that 
feeling of security without which no re- 
duction of armaments in the interest of 
peace seems possible. 

The Editor does not understand that 
Dr. Clark, in paragraph 5, asks him to ex- 
pound Article XVI of the Covenant of 
the League, and the Editor confesses that 
he had not before associated with that 
article the resolution introduced by the 
President of the Society in the House of 
Representatives relative to the exporta- 
tion of arms. 

In reply to paragraph 6, the Editor is 
quite willing to let Dr. David Jayne Hill's 
argument stand on its own feet. Until 
convinced of the contrary, he agrees with 




Dr. Hill. Of course, the Society has 
taken no position on the matter. 

The Editor hopes that the view set 
forth in paragraph 7 will be successfully 
worked out. 

In reply to paragraph 8, the Editor be- 
lieves, as already indicated, that an inter- 
national conference of all the nations, 
aided by the League of Nations, is prob- 
ably the hopeful direction along which 
the most constructive effort to avoid an- 
other Armageddon wiU proceed. 

What has here been said, together with 
the explanation elsewhere of what the 
coming celebration of the one-hundredth 
anniversary of the American Peace Society 
aims to accomplish, answers, the Editor 
dares to believe, the question set forth in 
paragraph 9 of Dr. Clark's thoughtful and 
helpful letter. 

There remains one other type of criti- 
cism of the American Peace Society which 
involves the nature of the Peace Society 
itself. This type of criticism is based 
upon the theory that the American Peace 
Society is faced with a dilemma due to the 
fact that it is quite clearly a totally dif- 
ferent organization from the American 
Peace Society of years ago; that formerly 
the Society was a non-resistant organiza- 
tion, made up of radicals who in the eyes 
of the general public, and especially of 
government officials, were more or less 
fanatical zealots, unanchored to practical 
realities. One correspondent who has 
been studying the American Peace Society 
suggests that the Society should now re- 
pudiate all radical pacifists and renounce 
radical ideas on war and peace, and that 
definitely and openly, quite as it has al- 
ready done in its current and openly stated 
aims indirectly. 

The reply here is that the American 
Peace Society has existed from the begin- 
ning for the purpose of co-ordinating a 
maximum amount of intelligent public 

opinion in behalf of an attainable inter- 
national peace. It is concerned to win 
friends and support and not to engender 
enmities and ill-will. The American 
Peace Society has never been a non- 
resistant Society, although many non- 
resistants have worked with it. It has 
stood throughout the years as an exponent 
of the principles of international justice 
found to be consonant with American prin- 
ciples and the best practice of nations. Its 
platform today clearly embodies the pro- 
gram of its founder. The thing it is work- 
ing for is the thing for which he gave his 

It has not been an easy course. As 
early as 1831, in the third year of the 
Society's existence, its founder felt con- 
strained to unburden himself in the So- 
ciety's magazine with these words: 

"Some abandon us because we carry our 
principles too far, and others because we 
do not carry them far enough. 

"Some think us too orthodox, while 
others complain that there is nothing of 
orthodoxy about us. For my own part 
I have only one opinion, and that is that 
it is incumbent on me to do the best I can 
to promote the cause of peace on earth 
and peace in the Society/' 

Looking out over another hundred 
years, the American Peace Society is quite 
aware that it will have to face, as did 
William Ladd, the barbs of criticism and 
divisions among the brethren. The Edi- 
tor, somewhat familiar with the record, 
believes, however, that there is a di- 
minishing unlovliness in the temper of 
the critics, and that, as illustrated by Dr. 
Morgan's suggestions at the beginning, 
there is a wholesome, growing demand 
that the peace movement shall be simpli- 
fied, unified, and energized. To aid in 
this business must be the American Peace 
Society's answer to its critics. . 





AS PAR as we can forecast the immedi- 
xJl. ate efforts in Congress to promote 
international peace on a world scale, they 
will be associated with four names — two 
members of the United States Senate and 
two members of the House of Eepresenta- 
tives — namely, Eepresentative Burton, 
Senator Borah, Senator Capper, and Eep- 
resentative Tinkham. The proposals rep- 
resented by these men have been referred 
to heretofore by the Advocate of Peace, 
but we are glad here to recall them. 

Eepresentative Burton, in his Joint 
Eesolution No. 1, now before the Com- 
mittee on Foreign Affairs of the House, 
proposes that the United States declare it 
to be its policy to prohibit the exportation 
of arms, munitions, or implements of war 
to any country which engages in aggressive 
warfare against any other country in vio- 
lation of an agreement to resort to arbi- 
tration or any peaceful means for the set- 
tlement of international controversy; that 
whenever the President determines that 
any country has violated such an agree- 
ment by engaging in aggressive warfare 
against any other country, and makes 
proclamation thereof, it shall be unlawful, 
until otherwise proclaimed by the Presi- 
dent or provided by act of Congress, to 
export any arms, munitions, or imple- 
ments of war from any place in the United 
States or any possession thereof to such 
country, directly or indirectly. This reso- 
lution manifestly represents an effort to 
forestall an illegally overt act by a would- 
be aggressive nation, and thus to lessen 
the chances of war. The resolution has 
received widespread commendation from 
various quarters, both in this country and 
abroad. It is now in the realm of prac- 
tical politics, a thing to be reckoned with. 
In a very real sense, it is one of the four 
corners of our Legislature's New Year. 

December 12, Senator Borah submit- 
ted his Senate Resolution, No. 45, setting 

forth that it is the view of the Senate of 
the United States that war should be a 
public crime under the law of nations, 
and that a Code of International Law 
of Peace, based upon the outlawing of war 
and on the principle of equality and jus- 
tice between all nations, amplified and ex- 
panded and adapted and brought down 
to date, should be created and adopted; 
and that, with war outlawed, a judicial 
substitute for war should be created, or, 
if existing in part, adapted and adjusted, 
in the form or nature of an International 
Court, miodeled on our Federal Supreme 
Court in its jurisdiction over contro- 
versies between our sovereign States. Mr. 
Borah's resolution goes on to provide that 
such a court shall possess affirmative juris- 
diction to hear and decide all purely in- 
ternational controversies, as defined by the 
code or arising under treaties. The reso- 
lution further provides that the judgment 
of the court shall not be enforced by war 
under any name or in any form whatever, 
but shall have the same power for their 
enforcement as our Federal Supreme 
Court, namely, the respect of all enlight- 
ened nations for judgments resting upon 
open and fair investigations and impar- 
tial decisions, the agreement of the na- 
tions to abide and be bound by such 
decisions and the compelling power of an 
enlightened public opinion. Here, surely, 
is another major effort to express the 
opinion of America upon matters of peace 
and war. Senator Borah has expressed in 
the later provisions of this resolution the 
faith of the American Peace Society 
through a hundred years. It, too, is an 
international corner stone in Congress' 
effort to take an advanced step toward a 
warless world. 

In Joint Eesolution, No. 14, Senator 
Capper approaches the problem from a 
slightly different angle. He proposes 
treaties with France and other Kkeminded 
nations formally renouncing war as an 
instrument of public policy and substitut- 




ing for it mediation, arbitration, and con- 
ciliation. The Senator's resolution pro- 
poses further to define an aggressive na- 
tion as one which, having agreed to submit 
international differences to conciliation, 
arbitration, or judicial settlement, begins 
hostilities without having done so; and 
similarly to declare that the nationals of 
the contracting governments should not 
be protected by their governments in giv- 
ing aid and comfort to an aggressive na- 
tion. Here, again, is an honest effort to 
enable our country to do something in 
behalf of international peace. It is an 
attempt to advertise the policy of the 
United States to adjust and settle its in- 
ternational disputes through mediation or 
arbitration, as set forth in our practice 
of a hundred years and as solemnly de- 
clared by the Congress of the United 
States on August 29, 1916. It is a pro- 
posal to accept and widen the offer of 
M. Briand of April 6, 1927. It is in- 
spired in part by the fact that the existing 
arbitration treaty between the United 
States and France is to terminate Febru- 
ary 27, 1928. It is aimed against those 
of our private citizens who may aid or 
abet the breach of similar agreements be- 
tween other nations. It undoubtedly ex- 
presses the opinion of a wide section of 
our American people. It may be said to 
be a third corner stone of the congressional 
international thinking of our New Year. 
House Concurrent Eesolution No. 2 
was introduced in the House of Eepre- 
sentatives December 5, the opening session 
of Congress, by Eepresentative Tinkham. 
Here, too, is a New Year corner stone in 
the aspirations of Congress. This resolu- 
tion would provide for the calling of a 
Third Hague Conference for the purpose 
of codifying itemational law. By this 
Mr. Tinkham means that there shall be 
an international conference of delegates 
from all civilized States for the purpose 
of restating, reconciling, and of declaring 
the rules of international law. This reso- 

lution conforms to the recommendation 
of the Advisory Committee of Jurists as- 
sembled at The Hague in 1920, represent- 
ing ten different countries, a resolution 
which was rejected by the League of 

Such a conference, however, is now 
favored by the League, providing it be 
held under the aegis of that body. With 
this qualification, it is also favored by the 
Special Commission on the Codification of 
Internationl Law, set up by the League, 
and by the Interparliamentary Union. It 
now appears that such a conference is to 
be held in Holland, probably in the year 
1929, unless, by the passage of this resolu- 
tion the convening of such a conference 
be advanced as to the time of meeting. 
In any event, this important resolution, 
peculiarly American in its nature, is a 
fourth corner stone in our congressional 
outlook upon the New Year in interna- 
tional affairs. 

There is a fine unity running through 
all these plans. They support, each in its 
own way, the common wiU to find a 
method for the settlement of international 
disputes without resort to war, the effort, 
often so scattered and sadly dissipated, to 
lessen the tragic in human travail. 

The hearings to be held upon these 
resolutions will go far to clarify public 
opinion in America on the world's most 
diflBcult of problems. 

Of course, other plans and projects will 
be submitted to the Congress. Indeed, 
Senator Lynn J. Frazier, of North Da- 
kota, upon the initiative of the Woman's 
Peace Union, has introduced a proposed 
amendment to the Constitution of the 
United States, by the terms of which it 
would be illegal for the United States to 
prepare for, declare, or carry on war. 
Senator Frazier believes, we understand, 
that this amendment will solve the diffi- 
culties now confronting the opponents of 
treaties to outlaw war. This is the re- 
introduction of an amendment originally 




introduced April 23, 1926. Whatever the 
logic in this proposal, there is, we believe, 
little chance of its adoption. 

The other plans are, however, thought 
to be suflficiently possible to be debatable. 
They will be debated. The unity in these 
proposals, as we see it, lies in their com- 
mon requirement of a universal accept- 
ance, if any one of them is to end in a 
maximum effectiveness. This leads to the 
conclusion that an international confer- 
ence of duly accredited delegates from 
all the nations is, perhaps, the outstand- 
ing need, especially at this, the beginning 
of another year. In such a conference, 
and only in such a conference, could Mr. 
Burton's type of non-intercourse. Senator 
Borah's scheme for outlawing war. 
Senator Capper's series of universal arbi- 
tration treaties, become most effectively 
the practice of nations. This, indeed, 
seems to be the theory behind the Tink- 
ham resolution, which contemplates just 
such a Conference. It is the Tinkham 
resolution, therefore, which rounds out 
and completes the four major interna- 
tional proposals now before the Congress. 


WE MUST know and lead others to 
recognize that a regime of positive 
law is the normal status within a civilized 
State, and that such a regime, supported 
by a juristic system, is the hope of peace 
between nations. In a carefully written 
analysis of "A Working Theory of Sov- 
ereignty," Prof. John Dickinson, of 
Princeton University, concludes: 

"It is therefore manifest that there will 
from time to time be periods of political 
development when sovereignty will be in 
abeyance; when force or compromise will 
dictate the outcome, not through law and 
in an orderly fashion, but irregularly and 
to the exclusion of law. These periods 
are the great germinal epochs of politics; 
but they are inevitably periods of disorder 
and confusion, and commonly also of 

bloodshed, and accordingly such periods 
must be occasional and infrequent if prog- 
ress is to be orderly and if society is to 
enjoy the advantages of political organiza- 
tion as contrasted with anarchy. Men 
have not attained the unity of viewpoint, 
the tolerance of adverse opinion, and the 
breadth of understanding of the needs of 
other classes than their own which will 
enable them to live together fruitfully 
under a regime of voluntary compromise 
to the exclusion of positive law. A regime 
of positive law must, therefore, be accepted 
as the normal status of civil society; and 
a regime of positive law presupposes and 
requires the existence of juristic sov- 

When we say that the overwhelming 
moral sentiment of civilized peoples every- 
where is against the cruel and destructive 
institution of war, we mean, not that men 
and women are afraid to die in defense of 
their right, but that deep down in their 
hearts they know that wars may be won 
and justice defeated, and that therefore 
war, as a means of settling international 
disputes, is not only destructive, it is a 
precarious, uncertain, and therefore dis- 
credited, method of establishing the right. 
It is for this reason that war is the 
greatest existing menace to the common 
weal. History clearly teaches that civili- 
zation runs its course parallel with the 
development of law and courts as substi- 
tutes for the methods of coercive violence. 
It is true that human beings have dis- 
covered but two methods of compelling the 
settlement of human disputes, namely, the 
settlement by law and the settlement by 
war. It is one or the other. There is no 
"happy medium" here. All alliances or 
plans to promote peace by basing security 
upon the power of bayonets carry within 
themselves the seeds of their own destruc- 
tion. Americans familiar with the his- 
tory of their own Union of States cannot 
forget that it was founded, among other 
things, upon the disarmament of the 
States. They cannot forget that Madison, 
Hamilton, Ellsworth, Mason, Sherman, 




Wilson, and the rest agreed in 1787 that 
the use of force upon a people collec- 
tively is war, and nothing else, and that 
the peace of justice does not lie in that 

Furthermore, we need to recall, as set 
forth by the founder of the American 
Peace Society through the many years, 
that our Federal Supreme Court is a 
practical and effective model for a real 
international court, it itself hearing and 
deciding controversies between free, sov- 
ereign, independent States, and that, at 
last, to the satisfaction of all. The difficul- 
ties in the way of outlawing war as an 
institution resolve themselves when men 
recall that our Supreme Court for one 
hundred and thirty-seven years has been 
showing the way for States to settle their 
disputes without resort to arms. 

There remain, of course, many things 
to do before the relations between law and 
the sisterhood of nations can be made as 
effective as the relations between law and 
the settlement of controversies of the 
States of our American nation; but the 
principles in both cases are identical. In- 
ternational law is no myth. Rules of 
conduct, written and unwritten, have been 
adopted by the nations in response to the 
practical demands of international activ- 
ity. These rides are looked upon and 
regularly employed as legally binding 
upon all States in their relations with 
each other. Much of this law is dis- 
tinctly legislation, resting upon voluntary 
agreement, without any imposition from 
above. This type of legislation among 
free, sovereign, independent States par- 
takes of the nature of contract, legal from 
every point of view, theoretical or prac- 

Addressing himself to the problem of 
international legislation. Prof. Frederick 
S. Dunn, of Johns Hopkins University, 
has written: 

"It need hardly be pointed out that the 
great need in world affairs today is the 
expansion and modification of the existing 
body of international law to correspond, 
with the rapidly changing character of the 
international community, and to reduce 
those wide areas of relationships now sub- 
ject to no control but that of comity or 
caprice. Present efforts to provide ade- 
quate judicial and arbitral facilities in 
the community wiU help to some extent, 
but real progress can only be achieved 
through recourse to the legislative process. 
It is, therefore, of the greatest importance 
that serious attention be given to the 
forms in which this process has appeared 
in the community in the past, its proper 
place in the international legal system, 
and the ways in which it may be made 
more effective in the future." 

At the beginning of another year the 
Advocate of Peace knows no better way 
to start its task than by recalling these 
fundamental^ things. 


A DEFINITE policy for the control of 
foreign borrowings by States and 
municipalities has been formulated by 
the German Government. Its loan ad- 
visory committee (Beratungsstelle) has 
had its powers broadened and has issued 
new regulations, the commercial attache 
at Berlin, Fayette W. AUport, has advised 
the Department of Commerce. 

A summary of the action and regula- 
tions, as forwarded from Berlin, follows 
in full text: 

The demand for capital, which con- 
tinues unabated, and the necessity of at 
least a potential means to regulate and 
supervise all borrowings from abroad 
prompted the German Government to con- 
sider reorganizing the Beratungsstelle 
(loan advisory committee). On October 




19 the Beratungsstelle convened for the 
purpose of formulating a definite foreign- 
loan policy. 

It was thought that the power of con- 
trol conferred upon it should be altered 
and, if possible, broadened ; thus, one issue 
before the committee related to controlling 
the amount of short-term foreign loans 
and their conversion into long-term loans. 

After the conference on October 19, 
proposed changes were announced which 
settled somewhat more precisely the 
Beratungsstelle 's scope of authority. 

The following terms were definitely de- 
termined : 

1. All foreign borrowing by States or 
groups of municipalities, whether direct 
or indirect, falls, potentially at least, un- 
der the authority of the Beratungsstelle. 
This provision includes practically any 
form of transaction involving the use of 
foreign funds. No foreign loans may be 
contracted unless warranted from the 
standpoint of the currency and of the gen- 
eral business conditions of the country. 

2. Foreign loans must run at least 10 
years and be callable by the borrower after 
five years at the latest. 

3. Foreign short-term loans of the 
States may extend for a maximum of one 
year, and they may be used only to 
strengthen operating capital. Assurance 
must be given that they will be repaid at 
maturity and not be converted into long- 
term loans. 

4. Proceeds of loans from abroad must 
be used by the borrower alone and may 
not be transmitted to private persons. 

5. Foreign loans must serve a produc- 
tive purpose — they must create revenue 
for interest and sinking fund, and, in so 
far as possible, by increasing exports or 
decreasing imports. In any event, they 
must serve the general economic welfare 
of the country. 

After a subsequent meeting of the 
Beratungsstelle it was stated that long- 
term and short-term loans by States and 
municipalities, which fulfill the policy 
formulated at the conference of October 
19, would be temporarily exempt from 
prior approval by the Beratungsstelle. 

The regime of prior approval might be 
resumed at any time by notifying the 
States and municipalities. It was ex- 
pected that such notice might be given 
during the week ended November 12. 

The composition of the Beratungsstelle 
remains unchanged. It includes the 
presidents of the Prussian State Bank 
and of the Bavarian State Bank and a 
representative each of the Ministry of 
Finance, Ministry of Economics, the 
Eeichsbank, and the State in which the 
loan application originates. 

A majority of votes determines the de- 
cision of the Beratungsstelle; but if any 
loan application be disapproved by even 
one of the finance, economics, and Eeichs- 
bank representatives, the dissenting mem- 
ber may demand a rehearing. In this 
case the Finance Minister, the Minister of 
. Economics, and the President of the 
Eeichsbank personally will replace their 
representatives on the Beratungsstelle for 
the particular occasion. 

After an application for a loan is sub- 
mitted, the Beratungsstelle is to take im- 
mediate action upon it, and the decision 
is to be made known, as soon as possible, 
to the finance ministry of the government 
and to the government of the State apply- 
ing for the loan. 

The foregoing regulations remain in 
force for two years, and they are intended 
to be sufficiently inclusive and exact in 
their application to prevent any evasion 
by prospective borrowers. 





BRIEF biographical notes of distin- 
guished speakers at the Cleveland 
celebration next May have appeared in the 
Advocate of Peace. Our readers will 
be pleased to learn that Nicholas Titu- 
lescu, Minister of Foreign Affairs of 
Eumania, has accepted the Society's in- 
vitation to be present and to address the 

Nicholas (Nicolae) Titulescu was born 
in Craiova in 1883. After brilliantly 
completing his studies in Bucharest and 
Paris, while still very young, he distin- 
guished himself as one of the best lawyers 
and orators of Rumania. He was a per- 
sonal friend of Take lonescu. During the 
war he entered Parliament, and in 1918 
became Minister of Finance in the Coali- 
tion Government presided over by Ion 
Bratianu, and again in 1920 in the minis- 
try presided over by General Averescu. 
In this capacity Mr. Titulescu prepared 
the first project for the reorganization of 
the finances of Rumania after the war, 
which, with small modification, was adop- 
ted by his successor, Mr. Vintila Bratianu. 
In 1922 he was sent as Minister Pleni- 
potentiary to London, and as Rumania's 
delegate to the League of Nations he 
achieved great success every time the Ru- 
manian interests were at stake. In 1926 
he was sent to Washington by the Ru- 
manian Government to negotiate with the 
American Government in regard to the 
arrangements for the payment of the war 
debt, and on this occasion he came in 
contact with many prominent persons in 
the United States. In July, 1927, on the 
eve of the death of King Ferdinand, he 
entered the ministry presided over by 
Ion Bratianu, as Minister of Foreign 
Affairs, remaining, at the same time, the 
Rumanian delegate to the League of Na- 
tions, where he enjoys wide popularity and 
a universal reputation. 


STEPS should be taken in this Con- 
gress to promote the use of the metric 
system as a substitute for the system of 
weights and measures now most in vogue 
in this country and England. 

If the people of these two countries 
could master the words meter, liter, and 
gram, with their modifiers, milli and kilo, 
depending upon the division or multiple, 
the trick could be turned. Such a task 
does not seem Herculean. Or course, it 
could not be accomplished at once. But 
something has already been done and more 
should follow. 

There seems to be no doubt that our 
present system is unsystematic, whereas 
the metric system is simply an extension 
of the cent and dollar system, already 
more or less familiar. The system is al- 
ready used extensively in science, in fac- 
tories, in jewelry and optical industries, in 
radio, in government departments, and 
foreign trade. The importance of extend- 
ing its use, from our point of view, re- 
lates to the matter of international inter- 
course. It is the system in use throughout 
Latin America, and the inability on our 
part to handle metric orders is an em- 
barrassment in many ways, especially a 
hindrance to international understanding. 
If commerce, technology, and science find 
it an advantage to use the system of 
weights and measures common to practi- 
cally all the other countries of the world, 
it is reasonable to assume that it would be 
of advantage to manufacturers. 

The metric system is no new innovation. 
It has been in exclusive use in France 
since 1799, in Italy since 1861, in Ger- 
many since 1872, in Japan since 1921. 
The Britten Metric Bill represents a de- 
sirable "reform." 

THE Nobel Peace Prize for 1927 has 
been granted to two university pro- 
fessors, laborers in the world peace move- 
ment — Ludwig Quidde, of Germany, and 




Ferdinand Buisson, of France, the former 
sixty-nine years of age, the latter eighty- 
seven. Nominations for this prize are 
open to members and late members of the 
Nobel Committee of the Norwegian Par- 
liament, as well as the advisers appointed 
at the Norwegian Nobel Institute; to 
members of the governments of different 
States, and to members of the Interparlia- 
mentary Union; to members of the Inter- 
national Arbitration Court at The Hague ; 
to members of the Council of the Perma- 
nent International Peace Bureau ; to mem- 
bers and associates of the Institute of In- 
ternational Law; to university professors 
of political science and of law, of history, 
and of philosophy; and, finally, to per- 
sons who have received the Nobel Peace 
Prize. According to the rule, the grounds 
upon which any nomination is made must 
be stated and handed in, together with 
such papers as may be referred to. The 
awarding of this prize, therefore, is 
against the background of achievement. 
As a friend of both of these men through 
many years, the Advocate of Peace of- 
fers its heartiest congratulations. 

UNDER date of December 7, the Advo- 
cate OF Peace received from the 
Mexican Embassy the following state- 

"In view of the fact that the Hearst 
newspapers in their editions correponding 
to yesterday and today have used his name 
in connection with the ridiculous story of 
alleged intrigue of his government, the 
Mexican Ambassador feels compelled, rati- 
fying his previous statements, to declare 
again that the whole and every part of the 
absurd story is a mere fabrication of ma- 
licious falsehoods and forgeries." 

seems to be the most important sin- 
gle force for international peace through- 
out all our groping world. One touch of 
Lindbergh makes the whole world kin. 

DIFFICULTIES in the way of dis- 
armament appeared again in all 
thei. barrenness throughout the sessions 
of the Disarmament Commission ending 
at Geneva December 3. The failure of 
that conference, like the failure of many a 
conference, was due to the collision be- 
tween two irreconcilable views. One group 
of States, standing irrevocably for the 
Treaty of Versailles, insists that there can 
be no disarmament until first security is 
achieved. The other view is that dis- 
armament is the necessary prelude to se- 
curity. The former view is supported by 
the French and their followers, the latter 
in its most pronounced form by the Rus- 
sian. Characterizing the situation as an 
observer of the scene, the Editor of the 
Journal de Oeneve, rather sarcastically ob- 
serves : 

"Listening to these discussions, it is 
difficult to avoid an impression that every- 
body is right. Thus, we may begin to dis- 
arm, but we shall never get ahead because 
nations will not dare to disarm without 
guarantees of their security. But if we 
begin with security we risk never getting 
on to the next stage, that of disarmament. 
So we have been discussing whether to 
register, first, failure on disarmament, or, 
secondly, on security. And we have finally 
decided to fail on both at once. It is a 
courageous decision." 

THE failure of the Geneva Arms Con- 
ference is another illustration of the 
difficulty facing the governments in their 
direct attempts to reduce arms. This 
break-down at Geneva has been followed 
by a renewed interest, rather widespread 
throughout the United States, in substan- 
tial additions to our Navy, by evidences of 
resentment in England, and irritation in 

WHILE the crux of the difficulty be- 
tween Poland and Lithuania, namely, 
the right to Vilna, has not been settled, 
the dispute is less acute because of the 



conferences of the Council of the League 
of Nations, where both sides appeared and 
discussed their grievances. M. Pilsudski, 
Prime Minister of Poland, and M. Walde- 
maras, of Lithuania, will now enter into 
direct negotiations to end the state of war 
between the two countries, continuing for 
more than seven years. Furthermore, the 

Council of the League, through a special 
committee, is to hear Lithuania's case 
that her minorities are being wronged in 
Poland. We believe the temporary ad- 
justment of this controversy is but another 
illustration of the beneficent services of 
the League of Nations. 


ON OCTOBEE 21 the President of 
Albania asked for the resignation 
of his cabinet and proceeded to the forma- 
tion of a new one. At the same time he 
inaugurated a number of rigorous meas- 
ures against misappropriation of public 
funds and ''graft" and granted an amnesty 
to political prisoners and those political 
offenders who had fled to Yugoslavia. 

Composition of the New Cabinet 

In the reconstructed cabinet the follow- 
ing ministers retain office: Elias Bey 
Vrioni, as Minister of Foreign Affairs; 
Abdur Rahman Bey Libra, as Minister 
of the Interior; and Jaffar Bey Ypi, as 
Minister of Education. Suleiman Bey 
Starova becomes Minister of Finance, a 
post he held in an earlier cabinet; and 
Ferid Bey Vokopolo, a hardworking and 
energetic deputy, the first Minister of 
Agriculture — a newly created ministry. 
There remain to be filled the Ministry of 
Justice and the Ministry of Public Works, 
the duties of which will be carried out ad 
interim by the Ministers of Foreign Affairs 
and Agriculture, respectively. 

The outgoing ministers include the 
Minister of Finance, Faizi Bey Alizoti, 
whose methods in the realm of finance 
were neither successful nor popular and 
whose patent Italian sympathies were 
severely criticized throughout the coun- 
try; Musa Bey Yuka, the Minister of Pub- 
lic Works, whose fanaticism as a Moslem 
while acting Minister of the Interior was. 

in the opinion of many, the primary cause 
of the revolt of the Catholic tribes of the 
north in November of last year, and whose 
accession to wealth, since becoming a 
minister, has been the subject of much 
comment; and the Minister of Justice, 
Petro Pogo, whose advanced years proved 
to be too great a handicap on his energy 
and capacity for work. 

Foreign Instructors and Advisers 
A number of Italian officers have re- 
ported for duty with the Albanian army 
and will act as instructors in all the more 
technical branches. Their advent has 
given rise to a good deal of adverse criti- 
cism in some Albanian quarters, but it 
is obvious to the more thoughtful people 
that, if the army is to be put on an efficient 
and modern footing, it must have trained 
instructors. Major General Sir Jocelyn 
Percy, while still Inspector General of the 
gendarmerie, remains in direct command 
of the troops in the Northern Province of 
Scutari and at present is actively en- 
gaged, with the assistance of several of the 
British officers attached to the Albanian 
gendarmerie, in relief measures in con- 
nection with the floods in Scutari. A con- 
siderable river, the Kiri, has changed its 
course and is now flowing through a part 
of the town, causing much alarm and some 

Lieutenant Colonel W. F. Stirling, for 
some years adviser to the Ministry of the 
Interior, has now been given an appoint- 
ment immediately under the President as 




Chief Inspector of all Administrations, 
and it is hoped that a general tightening 
up in all departments may result. It is 
understood that the President is still 
anxious to find a Financial Adviser able 
to remodel and simplify the financial sys- 
tem, for it is evident that, so long as the 
financial organization remains what it is, 
the work of aU the foreign advisers and 
inspectors will be largely stultified. 


AFTER long negotiations, the Polish 
jl\. Government finally succeeded, on 
October 12, in obtaining an international 
loan for the stabilization of the currency. 
In these negotiations the Polish Govern- 
ment was represented by M, Czechowicz, 
the Finance Minister, and the foreign 
interests by Mr. H. Fisher (Bankers 
Trust) and Mr. J. Monnet (Chase Na- 
tional Bank of the City of New York). 
The presidential decree concerning the 
loan and the plan of stabilization of the 
zloty was published in the oflBcial Journal 
of the Laws of the Republic of Poland on 
October 13. 

Details of the Loan 

The loan amounts to 62 million dol- 
lars plus £2,000,000 — gross, less the costs 
of the loan. Thus the 4th section of the 
stabilization plan speaks only about 60 
million in bonds to be repaid in 1947 and 
to bear interest at the rate of 7 per cent 
per annum; issue price, 92, less commis- 
sion; redemption price, 103, duration of 
loan 20 years, with the right, however, for 
the Polish Government to redeem the 
bonds before maturity, at 103, in whole 
or in part, commencing October, 1937. 
Eepayment of bonds and interest will be 
secured by the revenues of the import 
and export custom duties. 

Mr. H. Fisher (Bankers Trust) and J 
Monnet (Chase National Bank of the 
City of New York) are appointed as fiscal 
agents of the Eepublic for the service of 
the stabilization loan 1927. 

In connection with the inauguration of 
the stabilization plan, based on the inter- 
national loan, the Polish Government has 

invited Mr. C. Dewey, former Assistant 
Secretary of the U. S. Treasury, to act 
as its financial adviser, Mr. Dewey's con- 
tract runs for three years, during a part 
of which he will be assisted by Dr. E. 
Dana Durand, who has temporarily re- 
signed for the purpose from the Depart- 
ment of Commerce. 

The Stabilization Plan and the Currency 

The stabilization plan introduced by the 
presidential decree is based on the recom- 
mendations made by Prof. E. W. Kem- 
merer, who had spent several months in 
Poland last year studying the problem. 
Under the plan, the gold content of the 
Polish currency, the zloty, is reduced by 
72 per cent. During 1924 and 1925 the 
Polish Government attempted to maintain 
its currency at parity with the gold franc, 
but this proved impossible, and the gold 
value of the zloty has been fixed in such 
a way that one dollar equals 8.91 zlotys. 

The principles of the monetary system 
are fundamentally changed by the intro- 
duction of the full gold standard. The 
Bank Polski is henceforward obliged to 
exchange the banknotes against gold, 
gold coins or foreign exchange and checks 
having full gold value ; on the other hand, 
the Polish mint shall issue gold coins on 
the account of the Treasury or that of 
private persons, without limitation. 

Thus the circulation of currency will 
be composed of the (1) notes of Bank 
Polski; (2) gold coins; (3) bullion, which 
will be coined by treasury, but only to 
the amount of 320,000,000 zlotys. The 
government resign, once for all, the right 
to issue government (treasury) notes, and 
as well as the right of requiring advances 
and credits of any kind on the part of the 
Bank Polski. The new duties of the 
Bank Polski will be secured by the gold 
cover, which henceforward will amount to 
40 per cent (instead of the former 30 per 
cent) and shall be applied not only to 
the notes of the Bank Polski, but also to 
the treasury and private deposits. Three- 
quarters of the cover shall consist of gold 
bars and gold coins. 

Other Provisions of the Plan 

Under the stabilization plan, the State 
budget must, during the next two years. 




not only be in equilibrium, but mitst show 
an actual surplus, and the government 
must increase the revenues by 300 millions 
yearly. The taxation system shall be 
amended under auspices of a specially ap- 
pointed committee. In accordance with 
the recommendations made by Professor 
Kemmerer, the land, income and indirect 
taxes shall be increased and partly 
amended (income tax), the capital levy 
shall assume a permanent character and 
will be paid by yearly installments, while 
the industrial tax will be reduced. 

One of the most important provisions 
stipulates that the Finance Minister shall 
have no right to grant credits to State 
banks, communities, public undertakings, 
or credits of any kind, except to the com- 
munities to an amount not exceeding one- 
fifth of the taxes due to them, for one 
year only, a procedure which gives such 
credits rather the character of an advance 
against these taxes. Another provision 
deprives the government of the right of 
contracting loans, foreign as well as in- 
ternal, of any kind during the period of 
three years, with the exception of those 
for productive investment. 

The State railway system will be reor- 
ganized and based either on autonomy or 
commercial principles, thanks to which 
they are expected to yield profits in con- 
formity with the capital invested. Hopes 
are expressed that a large foreign loan may 
be obtained for them, which would enable 
the system to be extended, thus meeting 
one of the most vital needs of the coun- 
try, especially as regards agriculture. 

Disposal of the Loan Proceeds 

The larger part of the proceeds of the 
loan (over 400 million zlotys) is destined 
for stabilization purposes, namely, 75 mill, 
zl. for increasing the share capital of the 
Polish Bank, 140 mil. zl. for the redemp- 
tion of the treasury bills, 90 mill. zl. for 
the silver conversion, 25 mill. zl. for the 
floating debt, 75 mill. zl. to form a treas- 
ury reserve, while the remainder, amount- 
ing only to 135 mill, zlotys, is destined for 
economic purposes, especially for State 
undertakings and agricultural credits. 


THE British Government has just is- 
sued the first two volumes of British 
Documents on the Origins of the War, 
1898-191Jf (H. M. Stationery Office), 
which have been edited by Mr. G. P. 
Gooch and Mr. Harold Temperley. Vol- 
ume I is entitled The End of British Isola- 
tion, and Volume II The Anglo-Japanese 
Alliance and the Franco-British Entente. 
The decision to publish this selection of 
diplomatic documents was made by Mr. 
Eamsay MacDonald when Foreign Secre- 
tary, and it was subsequently confirmed by 
Sir Austen Chamberlain. Mr. Mac- 
Donald's view was that as the secrets of 
the archives of Berlin, Vienna, and St. 
Petersburg had been disclosed to the 
world, it would be in the interests of his- 
toric truth that the contemporaneous 
British dispatches and memoranda should 
also be published. 

The Policy of Isolation 

The papers published in the present 
volumes begin in 1898, when the decision 
to abandon the traditional policy of 
"splendid isolation'" and to substitute for 
it one of alliances was taken, and they 
end with the signing of the Anglo-French 
agreements in 1904, which might properly 
be described as the establishment of the 
Entente Cordiale. 

The grounds on which British min- 
isters came to the conclusion that a new 
departure in foreign policy was expedient 
can be found in a dispatch from Lord 
Dufferin when he was Ambassador in Paris 
in 1893. He there described the senti- 
ments of the French people of all classes 
towards us as that of unmitigated and bit- 
ter dislike. "Not a day passes," he wrote, 
"that we are not taken to task for our 
sordid politics; our overbearing manners, 
our selfishness, our perfidy, and our other 
inveterate bad qualities." Lord Dujfferin 
concluded by saying that it was incum- 
bent on him to call serious attention to 
"the desirability of being prepared to meet, 
and cope with, all eventualities." 




Anglo-German Negotiations 

The first attempt at an Anglo-German 
understanding appears to have been made 
in March, 1898, but the matter was in the 
hands of Mr. Chamberlain, and was 
treated more or less as a private trans- 
action, with the result that there is prac- 
tically no evidence in the official records 
of the Foreign Office as to what took place. 
The effort was not attended with success. 

In 1900 China was thrown into con- 
fusion by the Boxer Rebellion, and it be- 
came necessary for the Powers to send 
forces to relieve the besieged European 
legations at Peking. The German Em- 
peror took the opportunity of making 
overtures to the British Government with 
a view to co-operation in maintaining the 
principle of the "open door" in China, and 
an agreement to this effect was arrived at. 
Sir Eyre Crowe comments on this trans- 
action in a memorandum dated 1907 : 

About this time Germany secretly ap- 
proached Russia with a view to the conclu- 
sion of an agreement by which Germany 
would also have obtained the much-desired 
foothold on the Yangtze, then considered to 
be practically a British preservej. These 
overtures being rejected, Germany wished at 
least to prevent England from obtaining what 
she herself had failed to secure. She pro- 
posed to the British Cabinet a self-denying 
agreement stipulating that neither power 
should endeavor to obtain any territorial ad- 
vantages in Chinese dominions, and that if 
any third power should endeavor to do so both 
should take common action. 

The British Government did not conceal 
their great reluctance to this arrangement. 
There was no obvious reason why England 
should lend herself to this gratuitous tying 
of her own hands. Nevertheless, the policy 
of conciliating Germany by meeting her ex- 
pressed wishes once more triumphed. The 
sequences. Russian aggression in Manchuria 
agreement was signed — with the foreseen con- 
was declared to be altogether outside the 
scope of what the German Chancellor took 
care to style the Yangtze agreement, as if its 
terms had referred specially to that restricted 
area of China, and the German designs on 
Shantung continue to this day to be tenaci- 
ously pursued. 

"The Triple or Dual Alliance?" 

The next chapter is the proposal for 
an Anglo-German alliance. According to 
the German account, what took place was 
that during a visit to Chatsworth in 1901 
Baron Eckardstein was assured by Mr. 
Chamberlain and the Duke of Devonshire 
that the time for "splendid isolation" was 
over; that England desired to settle all 
pending questions, especially Morocco and 
the Far East, in co-operation with the 
Triple or the Dual Alliance; that, unlike 
some of their colleagues, they would 
prefer the former, and that, failing agree- 
ment with the Triple Alliance, they would 
turn to France and Russia. 

Lord Lansdowne attributed the sug- 
gestion of an alliance to Baron Eckard- 
stein. However that might be. Lord 
Lansdowne, in a dispatch to the British 
Ambassador at Berlin on March 18, 1901, 
stated that a conversation on the subject 
with Baron Eckardstein took place at the 
Foreign Office; that what the latter sug- 
gested was "a purely defensive alliance 
between the two powers, directed solely 
against France and Russia,'" and that "so 
long as Germany or England were at- 
tacked by one only of the two other powers 
the alliance would operate, but if either 
Germany or England had to defend itself 
against both France and Russia, Germany 
would have to help England or England 
Germany, as the case might be." 

Lord Salisbury, then Prime Minister, 
was abroad ill and nothing was done for 
the time, though Lord Lansdowne re- 
marked that Baron Eckardstein "several 
times reverted to the subject." In a con- 
versation with Count Hatzfeldt, the Ger- 
man Ambassador, the latter told Lord 
Lansdowne that the proposal was that "we 
should join the Triple Alliance." 

When he returned to England, Lord 
Salisbury threw cold water on the whole 
project. He pointed out that the liability 
of having to defend the German and Aus- 
trian frontiers against Russia was heavier 
than that of having to defend the British 
Isles against France. As to what the Ger- 
man Ambassador had said about our isola- 
tion constituting a serious danger for us, 
he asked, had we ever felt that danger 
practically, and insisted that "it would 
hardly be wise to incur novel and most 




onerous obligations in order to guard 
against a danger in whose existence we 
had no historical reason for believing." 
"The British Government cannot/' he 
said, "undertake to declare war for any 
purpose unless it is a purpose of which 
the electors of this country would ap- 

"Tortuous" German Policy 

A memorandum on the subject by Sir 
F. Bertie clinches the arguments used by 
Lord Salisbury. According to him, the 
Germans had become more insistent in 
their advice that we should lose no more 
time in coming to terms with them, as 
otherwise we should be too late, as they 
had other offers. For years, he remarks, 
they had constantly made use of these 
threats and blandishments, but in con- 
sidering the offers of alliance from Ger- 
many it was necessary to remember the 
history of Prussia as regards alliances, 
and the conduct of the Bismarck Govern- 
ment in making a treaty with Eussia con- 
cerning and behind the back of Austria, 
the ally of Germany, and also to bear in 
mind the position of Germany in Europe 
as against France and Eussia, and her 
position in other parts of the world as 
against the British Empire. 

After pointing out that Germany was 
in a dangerous position in Europe, and 
that she was surrounded by governments 
who distrusted her and peoples who dis- 
liked her, he observed that it was her ob- 
ject to create and maintain distrust be- 
tween the powers not in alliance with her, 
and particularly between England and 
Eussia and between England and France. 
She therefore did what she could to keep 
open sores with England. He continued : 

Numerous instances might be given of tlie 
tortuous policy of the German Government, 
but for a good example of it we need go no 
farther back than last spring (March). 
They then informed the Japanese Government 
that they disapproved the Russian proceed- 
ings in regard to Manchuria, and being, they 
said, aware of the vital importance of the 
Manchurian question to Japan, they would 
observe a benevolent neutrality in the event 
of matters coming to a crisis, and this atti- 
tude would keep the French fleet in check, 
while England would probably support Japan. 
On inquiry it turned out that "benevolent" 
neutrality meant "the strictest and most 

correct" neutrality towards all parties. The 
German Government could not answer for 
France, but they were strongly of opinion that 
France would follow the example of Germany. 
A month later (April) the German Em- 
peror described His Majesty's Government 
as a set of unmitigated noodles for having 
missed the opportunity afforded by the Man- 
churian question of asserting the position of 
England in the Far East — and, as he did not 
say, of falling into the arrangement designed 
for them by His Majesty, namely, that they 
should ease the situation for Germany in 
Europe by joining with Japan in a war 
against Russia in the Far East. The Em- 
peror further said that the Japanese were 
furious with England for not giving them 
active support, but of this we have not had 
any indication from Japan. 

A German Refusal 

Lord Lansdowne then thought that the 
objections to joining the Triple Alliance 
would not apply to a much more limited 
understanding with Germany as to our 
policy in regard to certain matters of com- 
mon interest to both powers, and he drew 
up a memorandum outlining the heads of 
such an agreement. But Lord Salisbury's 
verdict was that it seemed to him to be 
full of risks and to carry with it no com- 
pensating advantage. 

Lord Lansdowne then had an interview 
with Count Metternich, the new German 
Ambassador, on the subject, and asked 
him whether, assuming that we could not 
join the Triple Alliance, it might be pos- 
sible for the two countries to arrive at an 
understanding with reference to the policy 
which they might pursue on particular 
questions or in particular parts of the 
world in which they were alike interested. 
Count Metternich unhesitatingly replied 
that no such minor proposal was likely to 
find favor with the German Government. 
It was a case of "the whole of none.*' 

That might be said to have ended the 
overtures and negotiations for an under- 
standing with Germany. During the next 
few years unofficial efforts were made to 
bring about an improvement in the rela- 
tions between England and France, and 
proposals for a permanent treaty of arbi- 
tration between the two countries were 
made. When the matter was brought to 
Lord Lansdowne's notice he gave a sympa- 
thetic reply. In a conversation with M. 




Etienne in July, 1903, he stated that 
"nothing would give me greater satisfac- 
tion than to promote a reasonable 'give 
and take' arrangement between the two 
governments, and that if the French Gov- 
ernment would put their cards on the 
table and say what they wished to obtain 
and what they were prepared to concede 
with that object, we should be ready to 
meet them in a similar spirit." 

The Agreement With France 

President Loubet, who was accompanied 
by M. Delcasse, then visited London, and 
the two Foreign Ministers met and dis- 
cussed all the outstanding questions be- 
tween the two countries. M. Delcasse was 
anxious that the French position in Mo- 
rocco should be recognized, and Lord 
Lansdowne was equally desirous that "the 
Government of the French Eepublic 
should recognize that the British occu- 
pation of Egypt, which was originally in- 
tended to be temporary, has, under the 
force of circumstances, acquired a char- 
acter of permanency." 

An understanding on these points was 
reached, and all the other vexed questions, 
such as the Newfoundland fisheries, Siam, 
the new Hebrides, Nigeria, Zanzibar, and 
Madagascar, readily lent themselves to an 
amicable solution. The convention and 
declarations giving effect to the agreement 
arrived at were signed on April 8, 1904. 

These two volumes deal with a great 
variety of other matters, such as the nego- 
tiations that led to the signing of the 
Anglo- Japanese alliance in 1902, the re- 
lations between Great Britain, Germany, 
and Portugal in 1898 and 1899, Anglo- 
German friction in Samoa, the delimita- 
tion of spheres of influence in North 
Africa, and the proposals for intervention 
or mediation in the South African War. 

A German Contribution to the Subject 

Almost simultaneously with the publi- 
cation of the above two volumes, there 
appeared in Germany a very interesting 
contribution to the same subject. This 
was the new book of Prince Karl von 
Lichnowsky, the German Ambassador to 
Great Britain in 1914, entitled On the 
Way to a Precipice. Prince Lichnowsky 
declares that Germany approved fully 
Austria's wish to destroy the Pan-Serbian 

movement, and while England at first 
sympathized with Austria, the English 
changed their attitude when the Austrian 
ultimatum to Serbia was published. 

All the world, he says, except Berlin 
and Vienna, knew that a World War was 
threatened. But Serbia's reply was more 
docile than could possibly have been ex- 
pected. "If Eussia and England wanted 
war," Prince von Lichnowsky declares, 
"one word to Belgrade would have been 
sufficient, and the scandalous note would 
have remained unanswered." Sir Edward 
Grey then discussed the best way of set- 
tling the A ustro- Serbian dispute and made 
practical suggestions through the Prince 
to the Eeich. 

They were of no avail, however. Just 
one gesture on the part of Berlin, he con- 
tinues, would have sufficed to induce the 
Austrian Foreign Minister to be satisfied 
with his diplomatic success. On the con- 
trary, pressure was exercised in favor of 
an Austro-Serbian war. Sir Edward 
Grey asked for German suggestions, but 
Prince von Lichnowsky could not obtain 
any satisfactory reply from Berlin and 
the impression grew that Germany wanted 

Continuing, the Prince says : 

Fervent requests and definite statements 
by Sazonov and later by the Tsar's almost 
humiliating telegrams. Italian warnings, my 
urgent advice, all were unavailing. Berlin 
was determined that Serbia should be chast- 
ened. The latter wish, as the Prince shows, 
was expressed by the Kaiser in most definite 
manner in several of his notorious marginal 

After the Austrian Foreign Minister, who 
until then had showed strength, owing to his 
backing by the Reich, decided to yield. Dr. 
Bethmann HoUweg too lost courage. Russian 
mobilization — Russia waited and negotiated 
in vain — was answered by Germany's ulti- 
matum and declaration of war. 

Is it surprising, he asks, if in view 
of these facts almost the entire civilized 
world outside Germany charges Germany 
with the responsibility for the war? 
Prince Von Lichnowsky cites Herr Von 
Jagow, then head of the German Foreign 
Office, as having declared that Eussia was 
not prepared for war. He moreover tells 
how all the German ambassadors in Paris 




denied that France really wanted revenge. 
France was merely afraid of Germany, 
the Prince writes. England, he depicts as 
the nation working hardest for the main- 
tenance of peace, which he proves hy 
countless incidents. 


ON NOVEMBER 30 the French 
Chamber of Deputies began the dis- 
cussion of the budget estimates for the 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and, as 
usual, the discussion turned into a debate 
on the whole subject of the foreign policy 
of France. The most striking feature 
about the debate this year is that in it 
Germany was scarcely mentioned. It 
turned rather on the question of the 
Franco- Yugoslav pact and the whole topic 
of French policy in the Balkans and with 
regard to Italy. The treaty with Yugo- 
slavia has aroused a certain amount of 
uneasiness in France, owing to the uncer- 
tainty which exists as to its real implica- 
tions. Public opinion in France is dis- 
turbed at the thought that her new 
obligations to Yugoslavia might bring her 
into conflict with Italy, and she has a 
strong desire for a satisfactory settlement 
of her relations with that country. This 
anxiety can be traced in political quarters, 
which have little in common in their way 
of looking at things. There is certainly 
more anxiety at the moment in France 
over French relations with Italy than over 
those with Germany. 

Foreign Minister Briand's Speech 

In his reply to the critics of the gov- 
ernment policy, especially representatives 
of the Left groups. Foreign Minister 
Briand made extremely friendly reference 
to Signor Mussolini and seemed to be ex- 
tending to him an invitation to come to a 
frank settlement of the differences between 
France and Italy. Signor Mussolini, he 
said, was a great friend of France, who 
had done good service for the Allied cause 
during the war. He had met him at 
Locarno and would meet him with pleas- 
ure again. He was convinced that the 
two countries would be able to reach an 
agreement on all points without great diffi- 

culty. It was impossible to conceive of 
their ever being embroiled with one an- 
other in war. 

As for the Treaty with Yugoslavia, it 
was absurd to think that France had 
signed it out of pique, or that Italy could 
find any reason to take offense by it. It 
was the concrete realization of the friend- 
ship between France and Yugoslavia 
which had arisen out of the war. The 
original intention had been to include 
Italy in the treaty and make it a three- 
cornered matter; its signature had been 
postponed several times in the hope that 
this could be realized, but the idea had 
eventually had to be abandoned. Its text, 
however, had been communicated to the 
Italian Government six weeks before the 
signature, so that there was no question of 
its having taken Italy by surprise. 

Provisions of the Franco-Yugoslav Treaty 

In view of the great amount of specula- 
tion caused by the provisions of the 
Franco-Yugoslav treaty, the French Gov- 
ernment has made public the text of the 
pact. Following is a summary of the 
provisions : 

In the preamble the two ccntracting 
parties express their desire to adhere to 
the maintenance of peace in Europe and 
to the political stability necessary to both 
countries. They also declare themselves 
attached to the principle of respect of 
international treaties solemnly confirmed 
by the League of Nations. Convinced of 
the duty of modern governments to avoid 
a return to war and to prepare for the 
peaceful settlement of disputes they have 
resolved to give mutual engagements of 
peace, entente, and friendship. 

Article 1. That France and Jugo-SIavia 
I'eciprocally undertake not to engage in any 
attack or invasion, nor to have recourse in 
any even to war. This, however, does not 
apply (a) in the exercise of the right of 
legitimate defense, that is, in opposition to 
a violation of the engagement taken in the 
first paragraph; (&) in action taken under 
the application of Article 16 of the Covenant 
of the League of Nations; or (c) in action 
taken by a decision of the Council of the 
League or in the application of Article 15 
of the Covenant, provided in the last case 




that such action is directed against another 
State which has been the first to attack. 

[Article 16 of the Covenant deals with 
the "sanctions" of the League, and 
Article 15 with the method of dealing 
with disputes not submitted to arbitra- 

Article 2. The contracting parties agree to 
settle as follows all questions which may 
divide them and which cannot be settled by 
diplomatic means: those questions in which 
each claims a right will be submitted to 
judges by whose decisions they agree to 
abide; all other questions will be submitted 
to an arbitration commission, and if the 
recommendations of this commission are not 
accepted by both countries the question will 
be brought before the Council of the League 
of Nations. The methods and means for ar- 
riving at such peaceful settlements are con- 
tained in an annex to the treaty. 

Article 3. The two countries undertake to 
examine in common, subject to resolutions of 
the League of Nations, any question the 
nature of which may endanger the external 
security of either country or the present 
order as established by treaties of which one 
or other country is a signatory. 

Article 4. If the two countries find them- 
selves attacked without provocation they will, 
notwithstanding pacific aspirations, at once 
consider future action, and proceed to carry 
out their plans, always within the framework 
of the League, with a view to safeguarding 
their legitimate interests and to the main- 
tenance of order as establishtd by treaties of 
which one or other is a signatory. 

Article 5. In the event of any modification 
or attempted modification of the existing 
political status of Europe, the two countries 
will discuss, subject to any resolution which 
may be taken by the League, the attitude 
respectively to be observed towards such 

Article 6. Nothing in this treaty is to be 
Interpreted in contradiction of treaties al- 
ready in force concerning their foreign policy 
and signed by either of the contracting par- 
ties. Undertaking to exchange views con- 
cerning European politics, with the object of 
co-ordinating their efforts to maintain peace, 
each party will acquaint the other with any 
treaties or agreements they may conclude 

with a third power in this connection and 
aiming at the same peaceful ends. 

Article 7. Nothing in this treaty can be 
interpreted as being in opposition to the obli- 
gations of both parties to the League of 

Article 8. The treaty will be communicated 
to the League. 

Article 9. The treaty will come into force 
immediately upon ratification. It will re- 
main in force for five years and can be 
renewed at the end of the fourth year. 

The annex setting forth the methods of 
peaceful settlement of differences between the 
two contracting parties contains 21 para- 

France and the Italo-AIbanian Treaty 

While there is apparently nothing in 
the Franco-Yugoslav pact to indicate dan- 
ger for Italy, the Italian reaction to it 
has been one of bitter resentment, built 
on charges of alleged "secret*' clauses. 
Italy's oflBcial reply to the signing of the 
Franco-Yugoslav pact was the conclusion 
of a new defense pact with Albania. The 
purpose of the Italo-Albanian pact has 
been stated in Eome to be "the stabiliza- 
tion of the natural relations happily exist- 
ing between the two States in order that 
a policy of peaceful development may be 

The term of the defensive alliance con- 
templated is 20 years, and, unless de- 
nounced during the eighteenth or nine- 
teenth year of its duration, it will be con- 
sidered as renewed for an equal period. 
It is provided that all previous treaties 
between the high contracting parties nego- 
tiated after Albania's admission to the 
League of Nations shall be fully observed, 
so as to insure complete amity between the 
two nations, and that each of the high con- 
tracting parties shall protect the interests 
of the other with a zeal equal to that shown 
in the protection of its own. The mutual 
efforts of the high contracting parties shall 
be directed towards the maintenance of 
peace and tranquility, and they are 
pledged to employ all the means in their 
power to guarantee each other's security 
and to defend each other from external 
aggression. Should one of the parties be 
threatened with a war of aggression, the 
other party shall use aU possible means to 
prevent hostilities and to secure just satis- 




faction for the menaced party. In the 
event of the failure of such efforts to 
maintain peace, each party is bound to 
provide the other with whatever military, 
financial, or other assistance may be re- 
quested. In the case of war neither party 
shall initiate independent negotiations for 

According to the two letters exchanged 
between the signatories, which will con- 
stitute an annex to the seven clauses of 
the treaty and, as such, be ratified and 
registered, the contracting parties agree 
in case of war to confide the command 
of their allied forces to the commander- 
in-chief of the country attacked, and upon 
the conclusion of peace to repatriate 
within a period fixed by that commander- 
in-chief the troops sent to his assistance. 

The Italo-Albanian treaty was signed 
eleven days after the signing of the 
Franco- Yugoslav pact. In the Italian 
press no attempt is made to disguise the 
obvious connection between the two. The 
Impero, for example, published the text 
of the treaty with the following head- 
lines : "While France and Yugoslavia are 
plotting secret clauses and occult codicils, 
Italy signs a treaty of alliance with Al- 
bania in the light of day." 

This attitude on the part of Italy is 
naturally causing a great deal of uneasi- 
ness in France. A part of the French 
public opinion is worried over the pos- 
sibilities of entanglements in the Balkans. 

At the same time efforts are being made 
to remove the strain which now character- 
izes the relations between Italy and 
France. At the December session of the 
League of Nations Council attempts were 
made to arrange a conference between 
Briand and Mussolini. It is considered 
that a frank discussion of the differences 
would go far toward clearing up the sit- 


ON October 28 Italy celebrated the 
fifth anniversary of the Fascist 
march on Eome. This occasion was made 
use of by official writers for compiling and 
publishing the accomplishments which the 
Fascist Government had realized during 
its fifth year in power. The balance 

sheet, which fills many long columns in 
Italian newspapers, has been summarized 
as follows by European economic and 
political survey : 

Ministry of the Interior. — Eeadjust- 
ment of provincial divisions and creation 
of seventeen new provinces. Readjust- 
ment of communal divisions and suppres- 
sion of 188 small communes. Reform of 
the law of public safety. Methodical ap- 
plication of the law for the defense of the 

Ministry of Foreign Affairs. — Protocol 
between Italy and Egypt concerning regu- 
lations, decisions, and declarations of 
motives which were elaborated by mixed 
commissions under the Italo-Egyptian 
agreement of December 6, 192'5, with re- 
gard to the delimitation of the Cyrenaico- 
Egyptian frontier. Convention of com- 
merce and navigation, with two annexes 
and one final protocol, concluded between 
Italy and Greece. Pact of friendship and 
security between Italy and Albania. 
Treaty of conciliation and arbitration be- 
tween Italy and Germany. Commercial 
convention between Italy and the Republic 
of Haiti. Treaty of friendship, concilia- 
tion, and judicial settlement between Italy 
and Chile. Treaty of friendship, concilia- 
tion, and arbitration between Italy and 
Hungary. General convention on air 
navigation between Italy and Spain. 
Treaty of conciliation and judicial settle- 
ment between Italy and Lithuania. Com- 
mercial convention between Italy and 
Lithuania, with a final protocol. 

Ministry of Public Works — Railways. — 
Among the great works which were fin- 
ished during the year V, first place be- 
longs to the construction of the railway 
Rome-Naples line. During the year work 
proceeded on the following lines: Cuneo- 
Vintimiglia, Fossano-Mondovi-Ceva-Sa- 
vona-S. Guiseppe di Cairo, direct line 
Bologna-Florence, Vittorio Veneto-Ponte 
deUe Alpi, Ortiglia-Treviso, Aulla-Lucca, 
Lucca-Pontedera, Sant-Arcangelo-Urbina, 

Reconstruction of Devastated Regions. — 
Great progress was made in the construc- 
tion of cheap houses in the zone which 
had suffered from the Calabro-Siculian 
earthquake and in the construction of pub- 
lic buildings in Messina. 



New Roads. — Among new constructions 
mention is made of the termination of the 
great artery Lago di Garda-Meran and of 
the development of ordinary roads in the 
south ; for instance, in Calabria and Sicily. 
Moreover, important constructions of new 
provincial roads have been undertaken 
and many roads connecting with remote 
localities or giving access to seaports and 
railway stations have been completed. 
The automobile road between Milan-Ber- 
gamo has been finished. 

Ports. — The important work of organ- 
ization in the large seaports, a large part 
of which was given on the concessionary 
plan, has been greatly developed. 

Land Improvement. — For the coming 
year concessions for hydraulic improve- 
ment of land have been granted over a 
territory of 350,000 hectares. In San- 
dinia, Sicily, and Basilicata various agri- 
cultural villages were built with a view 
to preparing for cultivation vast tracts 
which are at present uncultivated or little 

Hydro-electric Plants. — The production 
of electric energy has increased consider- 
ably. The power in the existing hydro- 
electric plants has increased from 4,000,- 
000 H. P. at the end of the fourth year to 
4,200,000 H. P. in the present year. 
Among the plants which have begun to 
function, the following may be mentioned : 
The plant on the lower Siro, in the prov- 
ince of Sondrio (100,000 H. P.); the 
Marlengo plant, in the province of Bol- 
zano (40,000 H. P.) ; the Casseva plant 
(11,000 H. P.), which is connected with 
the water system of the Piave across the 
lake of Santa Croce (Belluno), the latter 
being already attached to another system 
of 60,000 H. P. furnished by various exist- 
ing plants; the barrages of Pavana and 
Suvania, which hold the waters of the 
Remo and the Limena and are to furnish 
the energy for the electrified line of Por- 
rettana; the first group of hydro-electric 
plants of the Sila (utilization of the cen- 
tral Neto, beginning from Timpo Grande, 
with a production energy of 140,000 
H. P.) ; the system of various plants des- 
tined for the utilization of the waters of 
the Neto and of the tributary rivers of 
the Arbo and AmpoUino, which will con- 
sist of six reservoirs with an aggregate 
capacity of 190 million cubic meters and 

of five central reservoirs; Sassari, with a 
capacity of 342 million cubic meters and 
a nominal energy of approximately 20,000 
H. P. During the year, moreover, con- 
cessions for hydro-electric utilities were 
granted capable of producing another 
400,000 H. P. of energy. Parallel with 
the development of electric power the 
utilization of water for irrigation purposes 
has been intensified; during the year con- 
cessions granted for irrigation purposes ex- 
tended over a territory of 30,000 hectares. 

Ministry of Corporations — Fundamen- 
tal Act. — The labor charter approved on 
April 21, 1927. 

Corporative Action. — Elaboration of 
standard rules of employment in banking 
institutions. Collective labor contract 
containing standard rules for discipline of 
labor, the principle of co-operation, discip- 
linary sanctions, provisions concerning 
personal rights. Constitution of the Cor- 
porative Executive Committee for regula- 
tion of prices, production costs and sal- 
aries, draft of corporative and organic 
statute within public administraton with 
a view to unifying the policies of the 
Fascist State. 

Ministry of Colonies — Libyan Col- 
onies. — Organic rules for the functioning 
of the governments of the Libyan colonies. 
After repeal of the statutes of 1919 and 
suppression of the parliaments, a govern- 
ment council and a general consultative 
assembly (Consulta Oenerale) were created 
and the financial autonomy of both col- 
onies was confirmed. By a royal decree 
which is now on the eve of approval, the 
legal rules for concessions of the State 
domain to municipalities and colonists in 
Tripoli and Cyrenaica will be fixed, leav- 
ing a large measure of autonomy to the 
local governments. 

The study of the exploitation of great 
salt deposits in Carenza, capable of pro- 
ducing 400,000 tons, has been begun. In 
Tripoli systematic experiments on an in- 
dustrial scale have been conducted in con- 
nection with the extraction of sodium 
and magnesium salts from the saliferous 
basins of Pisida (Bu Chammasse). These 
saliferous basins will yield 10,000 tons of 
magnesium chloride and 600,000 tons of 
sodium chloride. 

In the year V road constructions were 
particularly important in Tripoli, which 




already possesses 3,000 kilometers of 
roads ; 1,000 kilometers being built on nat- 
ural and 2,000 kilometers on artificial 
foundations. In Cyrenaica the road be- 
tween Benghazi and Barca (108 km.) has 
been completed and other roads, notably 
Barca-Cyrene (120 km.) and Derna- 
Cyrene (90 km.), have been started, all 
of these roads being constructed on artifi- 
cial foundations. Furthermore, many 
truck and caravan routes have been put 
in proper condition. The first section of 
the railway, which will run from Aziza 
over the Jebel, has been contracted for. 

Presidency of the Council. — Reorganiza- 
tion of the "Dopolavorao." Constitution 
of the National Organization "Balilla." 
Provisions in favor of the National Fascist 
Institute of Culture. Provisions cencern- 
ing the functioning of the national in- 
stitution "L'ltalica." Disciplinary regu- 
lation governing the use of the Fascist 
Lictorial Emblem. Provisions in regard 
to the functions of the Italian Naval 
League. Establishment of Lictorial rec- 
reation and sport grounds. Complete 
regulation of the statute governing right 
of succession in the Italian nobility. 

Ministry of War. — Application of the 
new statute of the royal army, established 
by law of March 11, 1926. Formation of 
the new territorial army corps of Ales- 
sandria. Formation of a new territorial 
army corps (Udine). New regulations in 
regard to the technical service in the ar- 
tillery; institution of a service of special- 
ists in the engineers' corps; new statute 
concerning the command of the general 
staff corps. Reorganization (organization 
and instruction) of the officers' corps of 
the royal army by application of the new 
laws of March 11, 1926, numbers 396 and 
398, regulating respectively the status and 
promotion of officers. Exclusive authority 
of the law on recruitment of the royal 
army approved by royal decree of August 
6, 1927. Gradual introduction of new 
army equipment. Reorganization of sup- 
ply of materials for artillery, engineer, and 
automobile services. Constitution of the 
"Union of Pensioned Officers of Italy." 

Ministry of the Navy. — Order for con- 
struction of four scouting ships of 5,500 
tons and of five submarines of 850 tons. 
Addition to the colonial radio-telegraphic 
gystem of high power stations for short 

and long waves; the radio stations of all 
great and small men-of-war were refitted 
and improved. Reform of the statute of 
the Royal Naval Academy. Under the 
direction of the office of the chief of the 
naval general staff, great impulse has been 
given to the consolidation and instruction 
of the fleet and its personnel in all 
branches of naval warfare. 

Ministry of Aeronautics. — New organ- 
ization which gives the royal air force 
greater power in aerial warfare. The 
necessary program of improvements has 
been prepared. Enactment of provisions 
relating to the formation of an air force 
reserve and to pre-military aeronautical 
instruction. Rules regarding recruitment 
and treatment of noncommissinoer officers 
and troops of the royal air force. Estab- 
lishment of schools for pilots. 

Ministry of Finance. — Issue of the 
Lictor Loan of November, 1926. Institu- 
tion of the Office of Amortization of the 
Public Debt. Tax reductions amounting 
to about 1,000 million lire. Establish- 
ment of a society for production of natural 
fertilizers. Reorganization of the Na- 
tional Institute of Exchange. Guaranty 
of credits to exporters. Disciplinary reg- 
ulations of commerce and commercial 
bonds. Amalgamation of the autonomous 
bank for mining credits of Sicily with 
the Bank of Sicily. New statute of the 
Bank of Naples. 

Ministry of Justice. — Law of November 
25, 1926, for the defense of the State. 
Law concerning the Lictorial Fasces as 
emblem of the State. Establishment of 
a Court of Appeal in Rodi. Provisions 
for the Italianization of the names of the 
new provinces. Law on rents and expul- 
sion of tenants. Rules and regulations 
for the exercise of professions. Reorgan- 
ization of prisons and improvement of 
agricultural and industrial penitentiary 
colonies. Reform of all codes, which will 
be completed in the year VI. 

Ministry of Communications. — Intro- 
duction of electric traction for all pas- 
senger and freight traffic on the Spezia- 
Leghorn line. The Ministry authorizes 
the administration of the State railways 
to buy and build, up to a cost of 80 rail- 
lion lire, cheap houses to be rented to 
railway workers. The management of the 
"Providence' society's food section is 




charged with selling its merchandise to all 
State employees. Speeding up the estab- 
lishment of the State hydro-electric gen- 
erating station in Pavane, which is des- 
tined to supply energy for electric traffic 
on the line Bologna-Pistoria-Florence. 
Speeding up the introduction of electric 
traction on the section Bologna-Florence. 
Eeduction of freight rates. Eeduction of 
accessory fees on freight. Opening of the 
straight railway line between Eome and 
Naples. Speeding up the introduction of 
electric traction on the section Pozzuoli- 
Solfatara-Villa Literno. Establishment 
of free ports. Submarine cable Anzio- 
Barcelona-Malaga. New radio station 
Eome-Torrenuova. Inauguration of the 
railway station in Forli. 

Ministry of National Economy. — Es- 
tablishment of provincial offices and 
councils of economy. Provisions for the 
development of grain cultivation. Ap- 
pointment of itinerant lecturers on agri- 
cultural subjects. Establishment of State 
domain concerns for exploitation of 
forests. Eeorganization of agricultural 
credit. Amendment of the law concern- 
ing industrial property. Institution of 
the National Office of Silk Industry. New 
mining law. Establishment of national 
standard for products of fruit cultivation 
destined for export. Law concerning the 
protection of savings. Eeorganization of 
the Cooperative Alliance of Turin. Ee- 
organization of the National Institute of 
Cooperative Credit. Disciplinary regula- 
tions concerning the flour-mill industry. 
General regulations concerning hygiene of 


IN VIEW of the participation of the 
Soviet Government in the disarma- 
ment discussion in Geneva, the question 
of the strength and character of the Soviet 
army acquires special significance. Ac- 
cording to a "Military Correspondent" of 
the London Times, the strength of the 
Eed army is almost equal to that of the 
pre-war imperial army. 

In 1914 the peace establishment of the 
Imperial Eussian army amounted to 
1,300,000, all ranks, a number swelled 
during the annual training period by about 

500,000 reservists. Today the Eed army, 
including the air arm, has a peace strength 
of about 1,124,000. Of this number, 
562',000 are provided by the regular army 
(including the organized Ogpu (political 
peace) troops) and the remainder by the 
1st Line territorial divisions. It is esti- 
mated that in time of war the Soviet Gov- 
ernment would have at its disposal about 
10,000,000 men between the ages of 18 
and 31, all of whom would have received 
varying degrees of military training. 
But only a limited proportion could be 
armed and equipped. 


As in imperial days, the army is re- 
cruited by conscription, and the men 
selected for military service are called up 
at the age of 21. But preliminary mili- 
tary training begins at the age of 16, and 
aU youths between the ages of 16 and 18 
receive annually 160 hours of drill and 
physical exercises. From the autumn of 
the present year the students in the higher 
educational establishments receive 180 
hours of theoretical training (and in this 
course women students are included) and 
two months' practical training in camp. 
At the age of 18 pre-conscription training 
begins, and in the following two years 
each youth undergoes a total of ten weeks' 
military training, the instructors being 
drawn from the army. In the 21st year 
he is medically examined and, according 
to the number which he draws at this 
examination, is allotted to the regular 
army, to the regular cadre of a territorial 
division, to the territorials, or escapes em- 
bodied service altogether. 

The period of service with the regular 
army is five years — two years with the 
colors and three on "leave." In the air 
force each man serves three years with the 
colors. The territorial army, to which 
many of the men not required by the reg- 
ular army are sent (the remainder go 
straight to the reserve), has a four-year 
period of intermittent color service. After 
the end of the five years of conscript serv- 
ice, men are transferred to the reserve, 
there to remain, with occasional course of 
instruction, until they reach the age of 40. 
Even then the country does not relax its 
rights, and the time-expired reservists are 
transferred to local formations. 




There are ten military districts (includ- 
ing the Army of the Caucasus) in the 
TJ. S. S. E., each under a commander with 
a staS of 800. These commanders are re- 
sponsible for the training and administra- 
tion of all military formations, regular 
and territorial, within the area allotted to 
them. Their districts are subdivided into 
divisional, regimental, and battalion areas 
under commissariats entrusted with the 
duty of registering men, animals, means of 
transport, &c., for military purposes. 

The army is organized into 21 corps 
and three cavalry corps. As a rule, each 
corps has three divisions and the usual 
corps troops, to which is added a gas regi- 
ment. Each infantry division (about 
18,595, all ranks, on war footing) has 
three regiments, each of three battalions — 
artillery, engineers, and signal formations. 
There are in all 69 infantry divisions, 30 
of which are regular formations and the 
rest territorial, and 12 cavalry and Cos- 
sack divisions, one of which is territorial 
(Cossack). New divisions are probably 
in course of formation. 

Automatic Weapons 

The infantry regiment (1,683, all 
ranks) is itself a composite body of three 
battalions, with mounted and dismounted 
scouting companies and a close support 
brigade of two three-gun batteries of 
76mm. guns. Each regiment has about 
150 machine guns, light machine guns, 
and automatic rifles. 

Cavalry divisions (each with a war es- 
tablishment of 8,500 all ranks) have six 
regiments (each 900 strong, with 16 light 
and 16 heavy machine guns), a mechan- 
ized force, and a cyclist company. A re- 
duction of the number of regiments per 
division to four is under consideration. 

The great number of automatic weapons 
in use in the Eed army should be noted. 
The dependence on machine guns implied 
by the numbers supplied to units is ex- 
plained, in part, by the relative inefficiency 
of the Eussian soldier in rifle shooting, 
and in part by the inherent difficulties of 
the supply of gun ammunition to troops 
operating, as Soviet troops must, in areas 
lacking the means of communications 
which are found in the territories of the 
other great powers. The decision to in- 
crease the complement of automatic weap- 

ons gives some proof of the military ability 
of those controlling the destinies of the 
Soviet regime. 

Transport is one of the more serious 
problems which those directing the for- 
tunes of the Eed army must face. An 
infantry division has under present condi- 
tions 3,900 vehicles and 9,000 animals and 
very little mechanical transport. This 
number is greatly in excess of that in any 
other army of the first grade. Measures 
are being taken to provide adequate me- 
chanical transport and much use is being 
made of the Fordson tractor, which has a 
value also as an agricultural implement, 
and can be made, therefore, to serve two 
purposes — one in peace and the other in 

It is probable that, in the event of war, 
the Soviet Government would decide to 
expand its forces through the territorial 
army. The regular army would be the 
covering force and the cavalry the strik- 
ing force. The territorial army would 
complete its training — with relative rapid- 
ity in view of the system of compulsory 
military education — and would be the 
nucleus from which new divisions would 
be created. 

In addition to the normal troops of the 
red army, there are those controlled by 
the Ogpu. They are a political weapon, 
devised for the suppression of revolution, 
the detection of espionage, the guarding 
of the frontiers, and many other func- 
tions for the protection of the government 
in being. Because of these duties, they 
are treated with special benevolence, are 
trained and equipped with care, and are 
maintained out of grants independent of 
those for the Eed army proper. 

The special section — the anti-revolu- 
tionary troops and the arm of protection 
for the Soviet Government — is organized 
as follows : A three-regiment division with 
one regiment at Leningrad and the other 
two in Moscow, seven other regiments and 
100 other sections (each of three infantry 
platoons, a machine-gun platoon, and a 
troop of cavalry) distributed throughout 
the country. The majority of the person- 
nel are Communists. The frontier guards 
protect the frontiers and engage in espion- 
age and contra-espionage and the convoy 
troops are employed usually in the escort- 
ing of prisoners. 




The Air Force 

The air force is an organization apart 
from the Red army, but is under the 
direction of the Commissar for War. Its 
reconstruction began in 1921 and today it 
is attaining some recognizable degree of 
efficiency. Many machines have been pur- 
chased abroad and some have been con- 
structed in Russia. There is a belief that 
Russia will shortly be able to meet her own 
air needs by internal construction. De- 
signs have been purchased from other 
countries, and skilled aeronautical engi- 
neers have accepted service under the 
Soviet Government. Some endeavor is 
made to select special personnel for this 
force, and youths who are sound in their 
Communist principles are drawn from 
secondary schools and undergo special 
courses in the Red Air Normal School. 
There are approximately 90 squadrons of 
12 machines each. Of these about 50 are 
reconnaissance squadrons, 25 are fighting 
squadrons, and the rest bombing. There 
are 14 schools for pilots and observers. 
The most efficient machines are distributed 
along the Russian western front. 

Armored vehicles, including tanks, 
armored cars, and armored trains, are 
under the direction of the inspector of 
artillery and armored forces. Careful 
selection is made of the personnel in order 
that none but professed Communists may 
be recruited into the branch. Each must 
have had initial training in mechanics. 
There are few tanks in the Red army and 
none of them of a modern type. Prepara- 
tions are being made for the equipment of 
tanks with anti-gas devices, and in the 
matter of defense against enemy tanks it 
is proposed that anti-tank mine fields 
should be laid not only with explosive 
mines, but also with gas mines. 

Gas warfare is regarded as important 
and endeavors are being made to devise 
new gases and to extend the means of 
production. At present there are few gas 
masks in relation to the strength of the 
Red army and only a small proportion of 
these masks are of modern type. It is 
said that during field exercises weak gas 
is discharged in order to accustom the 
troops to its use. As a form of training, 
this method is not popular. Gas officers 
are attached to corps, divisions, and regi- 

ments and each infantry regiment has a 
chemical section. There is a central gas 
school at which courses of training of one 
or two years are given. 


There is today a great lack of suit- 
able officers for commissions. The Soviet 
Government, anxious about its own se- 
curity, has a preference for officers and 
non-commissioned officers selected from 
the Communist Party, a preference which 
narrows the source of supply. There are 
many military schools. Among them are 
64 "normal schools," which take in sol- 
diers or civilians between the ages of 17 
and 23 and educate them to be platoon 
commanders. There is also a senior offi- 
cers' school for the training of brigade 
commanders and officers of still higher 
rank. The course is so arranged as to fit 
these officers for the command of higher 
formations. The course lasts for nine 
months. The highest school is the Red 
General Staff Academy, with a course of 
three years. At this establishment a 
thorough staff training is given. There is 
also the Military-Political Academy at 
Leningrad, where "military-political work- 
ers" are trained. Graduates are to be able 
to reply to the questions of Red soldiers. 
They must understand the international 
situation and must be able to set a correct 
party course. Their military knowledge 
should be satisfactory and in development 
they should keep pace with the executive 

The Red army lacks military materiel. 
There is a plentiful supply of rifles, and 
the means of production are adequate. 
Several types of machine guns and auto- 
matic rifles are in use, but many are badly 
worn, and as yet the supply of new weap- 
ons falls far behind the demand. Divi- 
sional artillery is equipped, as a rule, with 
one type of gun, but the heavy artillery 
has many types, with consequent disad- 
vantages in regard to the supply of am- 

The moral of the Red army is good, 
if the state of discipline can be accepted 
as a standard. The Russian soldier has 
not changed his attributes, and his powers 
of stubborn fighting still remain. At the 
same time his qualities in the offensive 
have not increased, and in operations out- 




side his own country his military enthu- 
siasm might decline rapidly. There are 
signs that the Soviet Government has not 
complete confidence in the loyalty of the 
army to the Soviet regime, and the Ogpu 
troops alone are fully trusted. All the 
available evidence tends to show that, 
though the Red army is a good defensive 
force, it could not wage successful war 
outside Soviet territories, and it is not in 
itself a real threat to the peace of Europe. 


BELGIUM has just passed through a 
brief ministerial crisis, which re- 
sulted in a reorganization of the Jaspar 
Cabinet. The crisis was brought on by 
the resignation of the four Socialist min- 
isters, and the new cabinet has been 
formed without Socialist participation. 

The New Jaspar Cabinet 

The Belgian Cabinet fell on November 
21. For some days prior to that there had 
been a great deal of uneasiness in parlia- 
mentary circles in regard to the reorgani- 
zation of the army and the introduction 
by the Socialist Left of a bill to reduce the 
period of military service from ten 
months to six months. At a cabinet meet- 
ing on November 21, the Comte de 
Broqueville, Minister of National Defense, 
made a general statement on the situation 
in connection with army reorganization, 
with particular reference to military 
cadres, the fortifications system, and re- 
duction in the period of service. He 
stated that it was impossible for him to 
introduce at present a bill dealing with 
the period of military service which would 
have the approval of all the ministers, 
and he therefore proposed that the mili- 
tary problem as a whole should be sub- 
mitted to a commission similar to that 
which dealt with the subject in 1920. 

As there was disagreement among the 
ministers in regard to this proposal, it 
was decided that the ministry should re- 
sign. The Socialist ministers were driven 
towards resignation by the growing hos- 
tility of their party to co-operation with 
the Catholics and Liberals. 

The new Jaspar Cabinet was formed 
two days later. The places of the four 
Socialist ministers was taken by two 
Liberals and two Christian Democrats. 
The program of the new ministry will be 
limited to financial and economic prob- 
lems and to questions connected with the 
army reorganization. The new govern- 
ment will meet Parliament on Tuesday. 
M. de Brouckere has resigned his appoint- 
ment as the Belgian representative on the 
Disarmament Commission at Geneva. 

The members of the Catholic Eight in 
the Chamber and the Senate held a meet- 
ing on November 23 to consider the po- 
litical situation, and passed a resolution 
expressing their confidence in the Catholic 
members of the government. The Liberal 
Deputies and Senators have decided to 
support the new ministry, which wiU have 
a majority in the Chamber of 17 in a 
total of 187 deputies. 

The Causes of the Crisis 

The ministerial crisis which has thus 
been ended has been considered as inevi- 
table for some time past. The Catholic 
and Liberal ministers refused to accept 
the Socialist proposals for the reduction 
of the period of military service from ten 
to six months until such time as the de- 
fense of the country was assured by the 
necessary armaments, fortifications, mili- 
tary cadres, and an adequate recruiting 

The Socialist Ministers, bound by party 
decisions, demanded, if not an immediate 
diminution of the period of service to six 
months, at least a promise from the gov- 
ernment that it would be reduced at some 
time in the future. The government could 
not give the promise. The Comte de 
Broqueville, Minister of National Defense, 
had intended to draw up a bill for the 
reorganization of the army, but the Belgian 
general staff, which in 1920 had opposed 
the introduction of ten months as the 
period of military service, definitely de- 
clared that in the present circumstances 
it was impossible to consider a further 
reduction. The Prime Minister, M. Jas- 
par, then proposed that the whole military 
problem should be referred to a comjnis- 
sion of 21 members, half of whom would 
be selected from members of Parliament 




concerned with military affairs and the 
other half from the army. This commis- 
sion would have been instructed to report 
to Parliament in the same manner as 
did the 1920 commission. The Socialist 
ministers were unable to accept this pro- 
posal, not for reasons of procedure, but 
for reasons of party tactics, as the Social- 
ist Party had decided recently to begin 
an energetic campaign all over the coun- 
try in favor of the reduction of the 
military service period to six months. 
This was the actual cause of the min- 
isterial crisis. 

The new government will appoint the 
commission and will refer to it the present 
military problem. This commission will 
be asked to carry out its work as quickly 
as possible, but the Minister of National 
Defense will in the meantime introduce 
a bill dealing with military works and 
credits for the purchase of armaments. 
The reference to the commission will cer- 
tainly have the support of the Chamber, 
with the exception of the Socialists and 
the two Communist deputies. The early 
settlement of the crisis was due to M. 
Jaspar's success in obtaining the support 
of the Catholic Party and the Liberal 


THE Preparatory Commission of the 
Disarmament Conference began its 
fourth session on November 30. At this 
meeting, for the first time, all the great 
powers of the world were represented, in- 
cluding Soviet Eussia. It was the Rus- 
sian delegation that provided the sensa- 
tion of the meeting. 

The Russian Proposal 

The Russian proposal, which was made 
by M. Litvinoff, head of the Russian 
delegation, was as follows : 

(a) The dissolution of all land, sea, and 
air forces and the non-admittance of their 
existence in any concealed ^orm whatso- 

(b) The destruction of all weapons, mili- 
tary supplies, means of chemical warfare, 
and all other forms of armament and means 
of destruction in the possession of troops 
or military or general stores. 

(c) The scrapping of all warships and 
military air vessels. 

(d) The discontinuance of the calling up 
of citizens for military training, either in 
armies or public bodies. 

(e) Legislation for the abolition of mili- 
tary service, either compulsory, voluntary, or 

(/) Legislation prohibiting the calling up 
of trained reserves. 

ig) The destruction of fortresses and 
naval and air bases. 

(h) The scrapping of military plants, fac- 
tories, and war industry plants in general 
industrial works. 

(i) The discontinuance of assigning funds 
for military purposes, both on State budgets 
and those of public bodies. 

(k) The abolition of military, naval, and 
air ministries, the dissolution of general 
staffs and all kinds of military administra- 
tions, departments, and institutions. 

(l) Legislative prohibition of military 
propaganda, military training of the popu- 
lation, and military education, both by State 
and public bodies. 

(m) Legislative prohibition of the patent- 
ing of all kinds of armaments and means of 
destruction with a view to the removal of 
the incentive to the invention of the same. 

(n) Legislation making the infringement 
of any of the above stipulations a grave 
crime against the State. 

(o) The withdrawal or corresponding al- 
teration of all legislative acts both of na- 
tional and international scope, infringing the 
above stipulations. 

The Soviet Delegation is empowered to 
propose the fulfillment of the above program 
of complete disarmament as soon as the 
respective convention comes into force, in 
order that all necessary measures for the 
destruction of military stores may be com- 
pleted in a year's time. The Soviet Govern- 
ment considers that the above scheme for 
the execution of complete disarmament is the 
simplest and most conducive to peace. In 
the case of the capitalist States rejecting the 
immediate abolition of standing armies, the 
Soviet, in its desire to facilitate the achieve- 
ment of practical agreement proposes a pro- 
gram of complete disarmament, to be carried 
out simultaneously by all the contracting 
States by gradual stages during a period of 
four years, the first stage to be accomplished 
in the course of the coming year. Under this 




proposal the national funds freed from war 
budgets are to be employed in each State at 
its own discretion, but exclusively for pro- 
ductive and cultural purposes. 

While insisting upon the views just stated, 
the delegation is, nevertheless, ready to par- 
ticipate in any and every discussion of the 
question of the limitation of armaments 
whenever practical measures really leading 
to disarmament are proposed. The delega- 
tion declares that the Soviet Government 
fully subscribes to the convention on the 
prohibition of the application to military 
purposes of chemical and bacteriological sub- 
stances and processes and expresses its readi- 
ness to sign the convention immediately. 

Replies to the Proposal 

The Eussian proposal was discussed by 
several delegates to the conference. The 
first reply came from the French dele- 
gate, M. Paul-Boncour, who pointed out 
that the negotiations for disarmament are 
carried on on the basis of Article 8 of the 
League Covenant, and it would never do 
to swap horses in midstream. For thou- 
sands of years the world has longed for a 
simple solution like that of the Bolshe- 
vists, but the difficulties have to be met 
one by one. The States concerned have 
international engagements and responsi- 
bilities. Even without armaments, small 
nations would be at the mercy of the 
larger, whose populations were more nu- 
merous and whose industrial capacities 
were greater. Soldiers, even when dis- 
banded, would be soldiers still. First of 
all, security must be established, and the 
technical work they are trying to do was 
the first step towards that end. 

Dr. Benesh (Czechoslovakia) explained 
that when they had first studied the busi- 
ness of disarmament, in 1921 and 1922, 
proposals very like the Soviet's had been 
put forward, but they had found that the 
only way of approach which promised a 
practical result is the technical considera- 
tion of the problem in a scientific spirit. 
It was really time to say that M. Litvinoff's 
proposals had been before the League in 
its earliest days. 

M. Politis (Greece) added the argu- 
ment that there had not been in history 
an organized society which had been able 
to dispense with force altogether. 

Committee on Security 

An important feature of the meeting 
was the creation of a Committee on Se- 
curity, the principal object of which is 
the interpretation and possible elaboration 
of certain clauses of the League of Na- 
tions Covenant. The committee consists 
of representatives of the following na- 
tions : The British Empire, France, Ger- 
many, Italy, Japan, Canada, Chile, 
China, Colombia, Cuba, Finland, the 
Netherlands, Poland, and Rumania 
(which are the 14 countries represented 
on the Council), and, in addition, Argen- 
tina, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Spain, 
Greece, Yugoslavia, Sweden, Czechoslo- 
vakia, and Uruguay. These are all the 
nations represented on the Preparatory 
Commission, with the exception of the 
United States and Soviet Russia, both of 
which will probably have observers. 

After discussions lasting several days, 
the commission adjourned for further 
study of the questions on its agenda and 
will meet again in March, 1928. It is ex- 
pected that the plenary Disarmament Con- 
ference will be held during the year 1928. 


ON DECEMBER 10, through the in- 
termediary of the League of Nations 
Council, an important step was made in 
the adjustment of a protracted conflict 
between Poland and Lithuania. The two 
Baltic countries had been in "a state of 
war" for nearly seven years, and although 
there had not been any armed encounter 
the condition of affairs represented a 
source of uncertainty and danger in east- 
ern Europe. The present dispute arose 
over the Lithuanian claim that Lithuanian 
schools have been closed by the Poles in 
the Vilna district, which claim was sub- 
mitted to the League of Nations under 
Article II of the Covenant. Back of this 
dispute, however, is the conflict between 
the two countries over the Vilna question. 

The Vilna Question 

The Vilna question came into existence 
soon after the war, when the Poles oc- 
cupied the Vilna district. Since then both 
Poland and Lithuania have claimed this 
territory, with the Poles in occupation. 




Ethnographically speaking, according to a 
handbook prepared by the British Foreign 
Office before the Vilna question became 
acute, "there is no doubt that Polish in- 
fluence is strong enough to make the 
Province of Vilna and the northern dis- 
tricts of Grodno form a Polish wedge be- 
tween the Lithuanians on the north and 
the White Russians on the south and east. 
The Poles in the population of the whole 
government of Vilna are probably about 
a quarter of the inhabitants and their 
center is the Vilna (town) district. The 
remaining three-quarters are a mixture of 
White Russians, Lithuanians, and Jews, 
the latter residing exclusively in the 
towns, Vilna especially. The land-OAvners 
throughout are mainly Polish and of the 
rest the White Russians are much more 
numerous than either Poles or Lithu- 

Historically, however, as the London 
correspondent of The Christian Science 
Monitor points out, Vilna has always been 
the headquarters of the Lithuanian na- 
tional movement. In 1905, for instance, 
2,000 Lithuanian delegates assembled at 
Vilna and demanded autonomy for Lith- 
uania. Further back, in the fourteenth 
and fifteenth centuries, Vilnius, as the 
Lithuanians call it, was the capital of the 
Grand Duchy of Lithuania, which ac- 
quired great military glory in wars against 
the Teutonic Knights, the Poles and the 
Russians. Later on, in the fifteenth cen- 
tury, Poland and Lithuania were united 
under a single scepter, which was when 
the Polish infiltration into Vilna took 
place. When Poland, with Lithuania, was 
partitioned, in the eighteenth century, 
however, the Vilna district was kept by 
the Russians outside Russian Poland 

In the confused period which followed 
the Bolshevist revolution of November, 
1917, Vilna changed hands about half a 
dozen times, being held sometimes by 
Lithuania, sometimes by Poland, and 
sometimes by the Soviets. The Lithu- 
anian State Council proclaimed the in- 
dependence of Lithuania at Vilna on 
February 16, 1918. A year later it was 
captured by the Bolsheviks, from whom 
the Poles took it on April 19, 1919, fore- 
stalling a Lithuanian advance by a few 
days, perhaps hours. 

Friction between the two rival armies 
rose to such a pitch that the Supreme 
Council at Paris decided to establish a 
demarcation line between them a week 
later. The terms of the settlement were 
not observed and on July 2, another line 
was laid down, giving the Poles appreci- 
ably more territory. A year later, at the 
end of April, 1920, the Poles attacked the 
Soviet Government and captured Kieff, 
capital of the Ukraine, only to be driven 
out again to lose more than they had 
gained, including Vilna, which they evac- 
uated on July 15, 1920. 

The town was then occupied by the 
Russians and by them handed over to the 
Lithuanians in accordance with the treaty 
of peace between the two countries signed 
at Moscow on July 12, 1920. 

For a brief three months thereafter the 
Lithuanians held Vilna, their claim to 
which had been recognized by the Allies 
in Paris on December 8, 1919, when Vilna 
was still in the hands of the Poles. 
The Poles, however, protested to the 
League of Nations in September, and as 
there was every prospect of hostilities be- 
tween the two rivals, an allied military 
mission was sent to Vilna to try to keep 
the peace. An armistice was negotiated at 
Suvalki on October 7 and signed by a 
couple of Polish officers on behalf of 
Poland. This left Vilna on the Lith- 
uanian side of the frontier pending a final 

But a couple of days later a force of 
Polish "irregulars" under General Zeli- 
gowsky drove the Lithuanians from Vilna, 
which has remained Polish ever sice. The 
Allies recognized the fcuit accompli on 
March 14, 1923, but their decision has 
never been accepted as final by the Lith- 
uanian Government, which still, as a re- 
sult of the Zeligowsky coup d'etat, con- 
siders itself at war with Poland. 

The Present Dispute 

The present dispute arose out of al- 
leged attempts made by the Polish Gov- 
ernment to close Lithuanian schools and 
to remove Lithuanian refugees from the 
Vilna District and scatter them through 
other parts of Poland. Reports of this 
aroused a great deal of excitement in 
Lithuania, which communicated itself to 
Poland and found expression in the 




Polish press. The feeling in Lithuania 
arose to such a pitch that a mobilization 
was even ordered. In order to avoid an 
outburst of armed activities, both sides 
were persuaded to refer the whole question 
to the League of Nations. The Polish 
Government, in addition to agreeing to 
this, also dispatched a note to all the 
powers, protesting its desire for peace. 

An interesting aspect of the situation 
lies in the fact that Russia also stepped 
into it. The Eussian Foreign Office ad- 
dressed a note to the Polish Government, 
in which it warned Poland against any 
aggressive designs upon Lithuania. The 
note stated that "public opinion in the 
Soviet Union is disturbed by the fact that 
there have appeared in the responsible 
Polish papers, without eliciting any de- 
nial from competent quarters, reports that 
the Polish Government has decided upon 
a drastic cutting of the knot of Polish- 
Lithuanian relations." As to whether 
these reports are well founded or not, the 
Soviet Government does not inquire, but 
it adds: "The Government of the Soviet 
Union, being an immediate neighbor of 
Poland and Lithuania, and by this very 
fact particularly interested in the preser- 
vation of peace in eastern Europe, feels 
itself obliged to call the very special at- 
tention of the Polish Government to the 
immense danger that any attempt that 
may be made by any country whatever 
upon the independence of Lithuania would 
constitute, whatever form it might take." 

End of the State of War 

The climax of the negotiations in Ge- 
neva at the session of the League Council 
was very dramatic. It is described as fol- 
lows by the Associated Press corre- 
spondent : 

Marshal Pilsudski, Premier of Poland, 
and Augustin Waldemaras, Premier of 
Lithuania, faced each other at the Coun- 
cil meeting, which was held in the office 

of Sir Eric Drummond, Secretary General 
of the League. 

Before entering the session, the Polish 
delegation said that broad lines had been 
established for the settlement of the dis- 
pute. It said, however, that the exact 
formula had not been found. 

While the Council was deliberating the 
Lithuanian spokesman said that what 
Lithuania really wanted was documents 
signed by the powers and Poland that the 
question of the sovereignty over the Vilna 
District is not settled, and that Lithuania 
had the right to open pourparlers with 
Poland for a definite determination of the 
Lithunian-Polish frontier. 

The spokesman declared that Walde- 
maras was ready to ask for such a docu- 
ment in case the Council pressed him to 
resume diplomatic relations with Poland. 

The crisis in the negotiations occurred 
when Marshal Pilsudski suddenly leaned 
over the table, pointed his finger at the 
Lithuanian Premier and said : 

"I have a definite question to put to 
the honorable representative of Lithuania ; 
is it peace or war?" 

The Lithuanian Premier did not quail 
under the gaze of the Polish marshal. He 
looked Marshal Pilsudski squarely in the 
eye and answered clearly: 

"It is peace." 

A ripple of applause broke from the 
members of the Council, and when this 
had died down. Marshal Pilsudski de- 
clared: "As it is peace, I no more need 
personally to discuss details of the settle- 
ment, which I leave to my foreign minis- 
ter, Mr. Zaleski. I shall order a Te Deum 
of joy to be sung in all the churches of 

Marshal Pilsudski then solemnly took 
an engagement before the Council that 
Poland will respect the independence of 
Lithuania, while Mr. Waldemaras under- 
took an engagement that Lithuania does 
not consider herself in a state of war with 





To OUR request for a statement of 
views as to the next steps in the in- 
terest of international peace, we select the 
following replies : 

From the Chairman of the Committee 
on Appropriations of the House of Rep- 
resentatives : 

My Deab Mb. Call: 

Peace with all the world and entangling 
alliances with none should be the watchword 
of America. We should quit considering the 
human race as fit only for gun fodder and 
lead them on to the promotion of peace, 
happiness, and good will. 
Sincerely yours, 

Martin D. Madden. 

From the Junior Senator from the 
State of Rhode Island : 

My Deab Mb. Call: 

I have your letter of December 12th, in- 
viting me to submit a short statement for 
publication in your magazine, the Advocate 
OF Peace, and take pleasure in sending you 
the following: 

Any society that will work for peace, even 
for one day, has my best wishes, but when 
a society has worked for 100 years it has my 
most hearty support, and I hope that it will 
continue for another 100 years. 

It has been my experience that when I 
have loaned money to a friend that I have 
lost that friend and made an enemy, and it 
seems to work that same way between na- 
tions. At the present time it is most im- 
portant that these United States should by 
word and deed show that our spirit and 
ideals are those of true friendship to all. 
So at this Christmas season let us renew the 
pledge, peace on earth, good will to men, and 
resolve to carry it out throughout the years. 
Yours very truly, 

Jesse H. Metcalf. 

From the leader of the Republicans on 
the floor of the House of Representatives : 

My Dear Mb. Call: 

In response to your very courteous request 
of December 13, I have dictated a few lines 
for your centennial number symposium. 

If you think it too militant, throw it in the 
waste basket, but it at least expresses my 
own views. 

If the words "next steps in the interest of 
international peace" imply action or mean a 
new movement of some character, then I am 
not prepared at this time to make even a sug- 
gestion. It seems to me that the cause of 
peace is most surely advanced by a modest, 
friendly attitude on our part and by a steady 
march forward, with as little of ballyhoo 
methods as possible in our progress. The 
development of our means for national de- 
fense especially should be along these lines. 
A failure to keep our army and navy in a 
reasonable state of readiness to perform the 
functions for which they are maintained 
would be inimical to the cause of peace 
equally with swashbuckling demands for 
sudden and immoderate increases in military 
armament. We desire the good will of all 
peoples everywhere. Without excellent rea- 
sons to the contrary, we should assume that 
we have it and act accordingly. Possessing 
the good will of others, we can best serve the 
cause of peace by pursuing a course that 
will prove to all the world our desire to merit 
and retain this good will. 
Very sincerely yours, 

John Q. Tilson. 

From the Junior Senator of Connecti- 

Dear Mb, Call: 

You ask me for my views relative to the 
next steps which ought to be taken in the 
interests of international peace. I cannot 
express my feelings more accurately than by 
repeating the words of the President's re- 
cent message to Congress, in which he says: 

"While having a due regard for our own 
affairs, the protection of our own rights, and 
the advancement of our own people, we can 
afford to be liberal toward others. Our ex- 
ample has become of great importance in the 
world. It is recognized that we are inde- 
pendent, detached, and can and do take a 
disinterested position in relation to inter- 
national affairs. Our charity embraces the 
earth. Our trade is far-flung. Our financial 
favors are widespread. Those who are peace- 
ful and law-abiding realize that not only 
have they nothing to fear from us, but that 




they can rely on our moral support. Pro- 
posals for promoting the peace of the world 
will have careful consideration. But we are 
not a people who are always seeking for a 
sign. We know that peace comes from 
honesty and fair dealing, from moderation 
and a generous regard for the rights of 
others. The heart of the nation is more 
important than treaties. A spirit of gen- 
erous consideration is a more certain defense 
than great armaments. We should continue 
to promote peace by our example, and fortify 
it by such international covenants against 
war as we are permitted under our Con- 
stitution to make." 

Sincerely yours, 

HiBAM Bingham. 

From the Junior Senator of Kansas : 
Deak Mb. Call: 

More than ten years ago we entered the 
war to end war. 

Yet, as this is written, formal announce- 
ment has just been made of a new naval 
building program to involve an expenditure 
over a period of years of more than $800,- 
000,000 by our own country. 

In this time of peace three nations — 
France, Great Britain, and the United 
States — spend not less than one billion dol- 
lars a year for the upbuilding and main- 
tenance of their navies. 

No one wiU deny that the people of all 
eiviUzed nations are single-minded in their 
horror of war, in their desire to use every 
honorable means to avoid another armed con- 

Nevertheless, the melancholy fact is that 
in the nine years that have elapsed since the 
World War ended our own nation has made 
little, if any, real progress on the path to 
enduring peace with other nations. Indeed, 
we are in danger of losing ground, for during 
the year 1928 the Bryan treaties of arbitra- 
tion with France, Great Britain, and Japan 
all expire by their own terms. 

We have put our faith in pious platitudes 
and mere fond hopes of enduring peace. We 
have not taken the first practical steps to 
insure it. We have clung to a belief that 
our geographical position isolated us from 
the troubles of the remainder of the world. 
Nothing could be farther from the truth. 
Our isolation ended many years ago. Our 
industrial and agricultural prosperity, the 
comfort and convenience of all our people, 
are largely dependent upon the maintenance 
of peace among other nations, whether we 
will that to be so or not. 

As the most powerful and secure nation 
in the world, we owe a duty to our own 
people, as well as to those of less fortunate 
nations, to take the initiative in transforming 
mere talk of peace to actual insurance 
against war. 

The way is open to us. We have the in- 
vitation of M. Briand, Foreign Minister of 
France, extended many months ago, to enter 
into negotiations for a treaty that will defi- 
nitely outlaw war. Such a treaty would be 
but the forerunner of many similar treaties 
with and between other nations. 

It is in acceptance of M. Briand's invita- 
tion that I have introduced in the Senate of 
the United States a resolution declaring the 
policy of the United States to be: 

1. To enter into treaty with France and 
other like-minded nations formally to re- 
nounce war as a means of settlement of in- 
ternational disputes, and to substitute media- 
tion, arbitration, and conciliation. 

2. To regard as an aggressor that nation 
which, having agreed to submit international 
differences to conciliation, arbitration, or 
judicial settlement, begins hostilities without 
having done so; and 

3. To refuse protection to nationals of the 
contracting governments who give aid and 
comfort to an aggressor nation. 

By adoption of the resolution, the President 
will be requested to enter into such negotia- 
tions with France and other nations. 

Mere public sentiment for peace cannot out- 
law war. Action is needed. Adoption of the 
resolution will be the first practical step to- 
ward peace. The time has arrived for defi- 
nite and absolute renunciation of war as a 
legitimate means of settling international 
disputes. The nation to lead in that re- 
nunciation is the United States. 

The responsibility rests on the United 
States Senate. 

Ahthub Oappeb. 

From one of America's best-known 

My Deab Mb. Call: 

I have your letter of the 9th and enclosure. 

I do not feel that I can give you a well- 
thought-out expression and would prefer, 
therefore, to write you this informal letter, 
with the understanding that I be not quoted 
in the Advocate of Peace. 

Commenting upon your letter to Dr. 
Thwing, there is no question that if war is 




forced upon this country every patriotic citi- 
zen, including tlie membership of the Amer- 
ican Peace Society, must uphold the hands 
of the government. There can be no argu- 
ment as to that. What we can do as a Peace 
Society must be done before a declaration of 
vi^ar is made or actual warfare begun. 

The suggestion made by Mr. Steed, that 
our government pass a resolution that we 
would discontinue all relations, furnishing 
no munitions, funds, and would not have 
communication with any country in the 
world that declared war without first having 
submitted their case to arbitration, either 
through the League of Nations or the World 
Ck)urt, appeals to me as one of the ways to 
prevent war, and particularly if it is done 
in co-operation with practically every other 
nation in the world making similar pledges. 

For myself, I am anxious to see some ar- 
rangement worked out which would make it 
unnecessary for any nation in the world to 
act upon the principle that they should have 
a navy "second to none." This "second to 
none" is likely to be an endless-chain affair, 
the size of any navy being controlled only 
by the amount of money that can be raised, 
and it does seem to me that the effort should 
be one for peace and agreements of mutual 
co-operation and defense, rather than a con- 
test for armaments. 

I can see no objection whatever to our 
having an air force sufiicient to control the 
air in this country and its adjacent waters. 

I favor the passage of such legislation as 
would make all our resources, capital and 
individuals at the call of the government. 

I have no suggestions as to the Centennial 
Celebration in Cleveland, other than such 
program as might forward the above. 

From the President of the American 
Exchange Bank, Pierre, South Dakota : 
Dear Mr. Call: 

Personally I am more in favor of using 
what influence we may have as against the 
extremely large and excessive expenditures 
by our government for the upbuilding and 
maintenance of our great war machine, the 
army and the navy; a smaller army and a 
smaller or different navy would satisfy me 
better. How much did we really use our 
great battleships during the last great war? 
They soon become obsolete and we use them 
as targets, &c. I would spend more than we 
are spending on aviation, which would be 
the more effective, &c. 

Agitation along these lines is what I ad- 

On the other hand, I stand for 100 per 
cent patriotism and loyalty to our govern- 
ment and all of its enacted laws. 

For defense of home and country, 100 per 

Our Society must stand full and always as 
an upholder of such laws as the majority 
have passed after due deliberation, and 
placed upon the books. Respect for law, 
for all law, is my own choice of method of 
advocating peace, the upholding of law. 

I have nothing but contempt and opposi- 
tion for those who try to uphold their own 
personal desires and judgments as proper to 
take the place of duly enacted law. 

Anything T ever say or write may be 
quoted. I am neither afraid nor ashamed 
of anything I stand for. If it is possible 1 
am wrong, I desire more than any one to 
get right. 

Yours faithfully, 

Chas. L. Htde, 




( 11,000 P. O* 

Reviewed by ETNA McCORMICK 

NOWHERE has Newton Ellery's his- 
torical insight found happier expres- 
sion than in his latest volume, The 
Saving Truth, which was cerebelle- 
graphedf to members of the Subliman 
Scientific Society at the fifth magnetic 
cycle yesterday. This history completes 
his mental and spiritual evolutionary 
series and in many ways is the most sig- 
nificant of them all. The theme of the 
book is our species's narrow escape from 
annihilation. Dr. Ellery graphically pic- 
tures the Super-Primate — the link be- 
tween the Primates and the Presubli- 
men — caught in the trap made by his own 
fierce nature joined to his evolving men- 

Dr. Ellery's excavations on the sites of 
New York and London — those ancient 
Super-Primate holds regarding which so 
many legends have been handed up 
through countless ascenderations to our- 
selves — convince him that the Subliman 
species passed through a dangerous period, 
during which, in spite of a mentality 
highly efficient in dealing with material 
facts, the race had not yet stumbled on 
the truth, obvious to the most atavistic 
of our own day, that individuals or groups 
ultimately prosper least when attempting 
to prosper at the expense of other groups 
and individuals. 

Dr. Ellery suggests that during this 
Super-Primate phase great numbers or- 
ganized themselves into belligerent bands 
for the destruction or exploitation of other 

*P. C. refers to the period of the Cerebelle- 
graph, the formulation of whose laws and 
governing principles was deemed significant 
enough to mark the beginning of a new era. 
It would require volumes fully to discuss the 
evolution of the cerebellegraph. The reader 
is referred to The Fourth Brain and subse- 
quent volumes. 

tDuring this period the cerebellegraph was 
used for transmitting most ideas. Print was 
seldom employed, except for material which 
might be valuable for future reference. 

hordes of Super-Primates. He even sug- 
gests that within the various groups a 
similar system maintained, and that not 
infrequently less influential members were 
required to die toiling or fighting for the 
material aggrandizement of their oppres- 
sors. The author is further convinced 
that an almost unbelievable proportion of 
the time and energy of the earlier Super- 
Primates was devoted to the production of 
agents of destruction. Certain highly 
complicated machines for hurling projec- 
tiles and certain gaseous bombs unearthed 
near Paris, another Super-Primate city, 
had no connection, he believes, with the 
promotion or betterment of life, but 
rather were dedicated to the forces of 
death and destruction. They were de- 
liberately created, he believes, for the pur- 
pose of wiping out large sections of popu- 
lation, irrespective of the eugenic pos- 
sibilities of those about to be destroyed. 

The author presents the rather startling 
view that during this critical Super-Pri- 
mate phase of the Subliman racial de- 
velopment there existed certain individuals 
whom he designated as Men to diiferen- 
tiate them from their contemporary 
Super-Primates; that these Men had 
begun to grasp the truth and to distin- 
guish the factors of creation from those 
of destruction ; and that for this they were 
persecuted by their contemporaries, who 
were intent upon maintaining the ancient 
murderous and suicidal policy as the 
established mode. Men increased, Dr. 
Ellery believes, not so much through the 
biological evolution of the species as by 
the weight of the idea. Prophets arose 
who pointed out what every schoolboy of 
today accepts as axiomatic, but which at 
that time were great and profound veri- 
ties with the stamp of novelty upon them. 
False faiths were swept away ; clear think- 
ing became the aim; heaven here was ac- 
cepted as the new Golden Rule. 

Once well started, the new idealism 
swept like liquid fire through the hearts 




of the more intelligent of the Super- 
Primates. The eager and questioning 
youth of all lands accepted the new doc- 
trines and pledged themselves and their 
lives and all their endeavors to creative- 
ness as opposed to destruction. Thereby 
the race, through both personal endeavor 
and a conscious attention to the problem 
of racial improvement, more and more 
nearly approached the Pre-Subliman type. 

The task was not an easy one. The 
problem of intergroup appreciation had to 
be solved. Strictly differentiated types 
showed a tendency to regard their ideas 
and their racial stock as worthy of pre- 
dominance. At times. Dr. Ellery believes, 
the very desire for heaven here led certain 
groups of late Super-Primates or Pre- 
Men, distinguished by numbers rather 
than by real intelligence, to contemplate 
launching attacks on rival groups. Dr. 
Ellery offers convincing proof that at one 
interval all that had been gained was 
saved only by the appearance of a great 
leader, who was able to demonstrate to the 
conviction of all individuals that an ability 
to appreciate the worth of antithical types 
is the most conclusive evidence of one's fit- 
ness for survival. 

During this period of evolution — the 
period of evolving Man — service became 
an honor. In the Super-Primate period 
certain false standards regarding honor- 
able and dishonorable employment had 
maintained, but under the newly dis- 
covered truth any work was honorable 
which promoted the realization of the new 
Golden Rule; any activity was dishonor- 
able which delayed this realization. Re- 
sults alone became the test of rightness. 
All the world was consciously toiling up- 
ward toward a finer, gentler, braver, more 
beautiful racial development. All the 
people of the world regarded themselves 
as tenants, passionately determined to 
leave to future tenants bodies, houses, 
lands which were more beautiful, more 
useful, more delightful than any yet 

Dr. Ellery is not content to paint thus 
emotionally the struggles of the early, 
ugly, afflicted, mentally darkened, suffer- 
ing, toiling Super-Primate species. He 
voices a warning that our beautiful and 
benign race is in one respect inferior to 

those Pre-Subliman monsters. They were 
swept onward toward the accomplishment 
of the seemingly impossible by the strength 
of their will and the potency of their 
vision. Dr. Ellery urges us to aspire to 
their energy and their altruism. The 
motto of our own eon, he says, should be 
every Subliman a god, for the Subliman 
was created to accomplish the impossible. 

The Saving Truth is an interesting 
book, highly imaginative and almost con- 
vincing. Dr. Ellery's contentions regard- 
ing the conscious upward climb of the race 
are, of course, not to be questioned. It 
seems a bit far-fetched, however, to rep- 
resent the Super-Primates as ever having 
engaged in the wholesale intergroup de- 
struction he believes once existed. Of 
course, he goes far toward establishing 
the plausibility of his theory by pointing 
out that during the age of the Primates 
life could exist only by struggle and blood- 
shed, and that a million years of conquest 
were in the muscles and nerves of the 
Super-Primates. Even so, however, Dr. 
Ellery's case seems imperfect. 

The creation of the type of destroyers 
he describes required a high degree of 
mental activity and acumen. It is un- 
thinkable that a species so skilled in me- 
chanical intricacies would fail to grasp 
the simple and fundamental truth that, 
after achieving a modicum of mentality, 
the inhabitants of a planet prosper only 
by helping each other, and suffer and 
decline by working at cross-purposes. 
With the exception of this logical defect — 
a serious one, to be sure — the book is 
superior and should awaken new interest 
regarding our origins. Perhaps the ex- 
perts will busy themselves with an exhaus- 
tive study of the facts or seeming facts 
which inspired Dr. Ellery to his interest- 
ing and stimulating work.* 

♦Note. — Just as I conclude this review, 
news comes of a significant discovery made 
by Dr. Small, of the Battle Creek Excavation 
Expedition. Dr. Small has unearthed a well- 
preserved bit of pressed wood pulp bearing 
the slogan "The food that's shot from guns." 
This find, Dr. Small believes, will go far to- 
ward esatblishing his theory that the instru- 
ments for hurling projectiles long distances 
through the air were used in the distribution 
of food, and not, as Dr. Ellery contends, for 
the purpose of intergroup destruction. 





T'^ HE last time I wrote to you, for I 
-L am writing mostly to women, I wrote 
on War and Peace. Since then there has 
been not a storm in the teacup, but a 
smash in China. It is hard to understand 
China. I am told that their wars gen- 
erally last a hundred years, and that there 
are very few killed outright. Often it is 
not the people who are killed that matter 
most in wars, but the ones who are left 
to live in a country devastated by war. 

But to my mind the failure of the 
Geneva Conference on the further limita- 
tion of naval armaments is a more serious 
world matter than the war in China. This 
failure is a direct challenge to women — 
not so much the women of the world, for 
that would be simply using words — but to 
the women of the English-speaking na- 
tions and the other democracies where we 
have the vote. 

Most people in America and Britain 
have at some time in their lives said that 
war between our two countries was "un- 
thinkable" or a "crime against civiliza- 
tion." Yet countries, like human beings, 
disagree, and frequently they quarrel most 
over points of little importance. War is 
the only way at present of deciding clashes 
between our peoples. It will be too late 
to try to find an alternative way of set- 
tling differences when we are in the midst 
of them; when national pride, jealousy, 
suspicion, have blinded us temporarily. 

At the Geneva Conference the United 
States and Britain disagreed — amicably, 
it is true, but yet dangerously. The main 
reason was that the two delegations and 
governments behind them looked at the 
problem from the point of view of what 
might happen in the event of war, instead 
of first of all absolutely ruling out this 
contingency and then thinking how they 
might use their strength to preserve inter- 
national peace and to vindicate interna- 
tional justice. What is to become of our 
civilization if the people of the British 

♦Reprinted with permission from the 
January Issue of McCalVs Magazine. 

Empire and the United States dare think 
in terms of war? It is because I believe 
that civilization largely depends on us that 
the failure at Geneva fills me with horror. 

The people of the U. S. A. do not want 
war any more than the people of Great 
Britain. But let us face the fact that 
there will often be points which will cre- 
ate differences, misunderstandings, and 
suspicions between them, and that unless 
these two countries can find a way of 
settling international disagreements by 
some other method than war, then war we 
shall have. I face facts, and one of the 
sad facts of life is that people do disagree, 
profoundly. They even quarrel. But in 
enlightened countries people no longer re- 
sort to fists and revolvers. They no longer 
carry arms or learn self-defense. So it 
should be with civilized nations. So it 
must be if we want peace. Mothers must 
declare that war is the greatest failure of 
modern times. Ask the nations of Europe 
what they think about war. Poor devils, 
they have seen so much of war that some 
of them cannot visualize peace. 

The Washington Conference in 1921 
was the greatest event in modern civiliza- 
tion. England, the United States, Japan, 
and France agreed not to build battle- 
ships against each other. America made 
great sacrifices and England gave up her 
position as ruler of the waves. The Big 
Navy Group in America did not like it; 
nor did the Big Xavy Group in England. 
Each thought that it was sacrificing too 
much. Perhaps, too, certain business in- 
terests which make money out of building 
ships and preparing steel and other ma- 
terials for ships did not like the results 
achieved or wish to extend them further. 
Mercifully for civilization at that Confer- 
ence we had men like Mr. Hughes, Mr. 
Elihu Boot, and Senator Lodge, with Lord 
Balfour and Sir Eobert Borden, botli 
former prime ministers within the British 
Empire. They were accustomed to think- 
ing as statesmen, not as naval experts. 
The Geneva Conference failed largely be- 

19 28 



cause the admirals of both countries took 
too leading a part. Navy departments 
exist to win wars and to make sure that 
they win. They would fail as navy de- 
partments and admirals if they did not 
aim at superiority in war time. 

If Great Britain and the U. S. A. agree 
to settle their differences by some other 
method than fighting, it won't matter a 
scrap what ships they have. They may 
each have different needs. I think both 
can be trusted not to start a war, and I 
believe that they are the only countries in 
the world to be trusted to stop a war. 

Both the United States and Great 
Britain stand for something good and 
worth while in the world. Each has its 
limitations and weaknesses, no doubt, but 
the world would be infinitely poorer if 
they were interfered with in their chosen 

The United States has shown the mod- 
ern world the practical road to democracy. 
She has created the highest standard of 
living for the mass of the people that has 
ever been known. She has been able to 
take millions from all the races of Europe, 
free them of their racial hatreds, and turn 
them into loyal American citizens. She 
ought, and can, lead mankind in develop- 
ing the ideas which she has evolved within 
her own boundaries. It would be wholly 
to the disadvantage of the British Com- 
monwealth that this process should be 
hindered. The only thing which could 
hinder it would be war between the two 
English-speaking nations, with the rest of 
the world lined up on either side for what 
they could get out of it. Such a war, 
whichever side was victorious, would in- 
flicti immeasurable loss and suffering on 
the United States, would harden — indeed, 
imperil — the liberty of her institutions, 
and impose on her a military tradition 
which it would be very hard to erase. 

Great Britain has done and is doing an 
immensely valuable work in both her sys- 
tem of administering justice and in parlia- 
mentary government. She has fought and 
beaten the great military autocracies of 
the world, one after the other. She has 
given ordered government, economic de- 
velopment, and peace to countless mil- 
lions of politically backward peoples and 
now is steadily training them in self- 

government. If anyone wants to get some 
idea of what British rule for backward 
peoples means, let him read the remark- 
able book Mother India, just written by 
an American woman, Katherine Mayo. It 
would be wholly to the disadvantage of 
the United States that this work should 
be interrupted or destroyed. 

No question can arise between the 
United States, Great Britain, Canada, 
Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa 
which would justify settlement by war. 
War is the most hideous, the most un- 
civilized, the most unjust, and the most 
expensive method of settling disputes 
which man has conceived. In the past, 
war has sometimes in some countries been 
necessary in order to prevent still greater 
evil. But, at this epoch and in the future, 
it would be a crime that democracies like 
ours should allow a situation to develop in 
which war was forced on us. 

Nothing is so inevitable as war, if once 
nations drift into competition in arma- 
ments or commercial suspicion and hos- 
tility, if they have not previously vol- 
untarily agreed to rule out war as a 
method of settlement. 

Let America and Britain (and if pos- 
sible also France and Germany) decide to 
rule out war between them. 

I do not pretend to know exactly how 
this outlawry of war is to be effected. 
Some people suggest arbitration. Others 
believe in the ideas embodied in the 
League of Nations or in The Hague Con- 
vention. Mr. Houghton, the American 
Ambassador in London, has made the 
extremely interesting proposal that our 
democracies should not allow their govern- 
ments to declare war upon each other ex- 
cept after a direct popular vote. 

I am not concerned at the moment as 
to the exact method to be followed. I am 
only concerned to point out the supreme 
importance of the issue. The Geneva fail- 
ure is proof that the drift towards war 
has begun once more. Unless we tackle 
the question now, it will become progres- 
sively more difficult to deal with. The 
root of the problem lies in the fact that as 
between nations there are only two ways 
of settling disputes — by peaceful methods 
or by war. We all know how bitter par- 
tisan political spirit can become inside 


OUT several countries, only there issues are men alone have failed to end war largely 
settled by majority vote enforced by the because the appeal of heroism and sacri- 
machinery of law and violence is pro- fice makes them blind to its hideous wick- 
hibited by the police. Even more violent edness. It is women who see most clearly 
partisan spirit arises between nations from the horrors and futile madness of war. 
time to time, and these differences are They realize that almost no cause can 
likely to become more and not less fre- justify the wholesale massacre of their 
quent as time and space are annihilated, own children. Let it be the primary busi- 
Only in this case there is no legislature to ness of our women to decide now that war 
give effect to majority decisions, no court shall be ruled out as a method of settling 
with unlimited jurisdiction, no policeman international disputes, at any rate be- 
to intervene. Today between nations tween the most civilized nations of the 
there is no redress save war. world. The time for them to act is not 
The women must take the lead in this tomorrow or next year, but now, for the 
crusade against war. I am for equal rights adversary is once more active in the land, 
between the sexes, but it is obvious that The Geneva failure proves it. 


Let us, whatever our origin or creed and regardless 
of our station in life, enter upon this new year with the 
determination to recognize honest differences of opinion 
and to make serious effort to get other peoples' point of 
view; to credit others with good intentions; to think 
and speak well of others; to ask no privileges for our- 
selves we are not willing to accord to others; and to 
remember that true personal liberty goes hand in hand 
with self-control. 

Percy B. Baxter. 

Piracy used to be legal, but when made a crime it 
disappeared. The same is true of slavery. Why should 
war, the most stupendous of curses, wear the crown of 
legality ? 

William E. Borah. 

A day will come when a cannon shall be exhibited in 
our museums as an instrument of torture is now, and 
men shall marvel that such things can be. 

Victor Hugo. 

He who is plenteously provided for from within 
needs but little from without. 








(The following discussion of the binding 
force of treaties was given by Representative 
Theodore E. Burton in the House of Rep- 
resentatives, May 16, 1922. It is regretted 
that the limits of space have made it neces- 
sary to eliminate some portions of the dis- 
cussion. — The Editor.) 

In determining the respective powers of 
the President, acting with the concur- 
rence of the Senate, on the one hand, and 
of the Congress, or the House of Repre- 
sentatives, on the other, three distinct 
theories have been advanced: First, this 
treaty-making power is final and binding 
on every subject for negotiation with a 
foreign power. The concurrence of the 
House of Representatives is obligatory, 
and in its essential nature only formal or 
perfunctory. In the language of Justice 
Daniel in a Supreme Court opinion oppos- 
ing this view, it would be a power single, 
universal, engrossing, absolute. Second, 
that it is the right of the House of Rep- 
resentatives to nullify a treaty which con- 
tains provisions which in any way in- 
fringe upon the powers of the House or 
may require its separate action, as in mak- 
ing appropriations or fixing duties upon 
imports, and that this right of confirma- 
tion or rejection is a salutory check upon 
the Executive and the Senate which may 
be exercised at will. Third, that while the 
right of the House to disapprove or nul- 
lify exists, there is, nevertheless, a neces- 
sary comity between the respective de- 
partments of the Government, a binding 
moral obligation, and it would be in viola- 
tion of the established division of powers 
to withhold action; also that the observ- 
ance of good faith in dealing with other 
countries requires that stipulations con- 
tained in any treaty ratified in the man- 
ner prescribed by the Constitution be 
made effectual by action of the House. 

The first view was strenuously main- 
tained by President Washington in a letter 
transmitted to the House of Representa- 
tives March 30, 1796, in response to a 
request for the papers relating to the Jay 
Treaty. In this letter he expressed him- 
self as follows : 

Having been a member of the general con- 
vention and knowing the principles on which 
the Constitution was formed, I have ever 
entertained but one opinion on this subject; 
and from the first establishment of the gov- 
ernment to this moment my conduct has 
exemplified that opinion — that the power of 
making treaties is exclusively vested in the 
President, by and with the advice and con- 
sent of the Senate, provided two-thirds of 
the Senators present concur ; and that every 
treaty so made and promulgated thencefor- 
ward became the law of the land. It is thus 
that the treaty-making power has been un- 
derstood by foreign nations, and in all the 
treaties made with them we have declared 
and they have believed that, when ratified by 
the President, with the advice and consent of 
the Senate, they became obligatory. In this 
construction of the Constitution every House 
of Representatives has heretofore acquiesced, 
and until the present time not a doubt or 
suspicion has appeared, to my knowledge, 
that this construction was not the true one. 
Nay, they have more than acquiesced, for 
till now, without controverting the obligation 
of such treaties, they have made all the 
requisite provisions for carrying them into 

The same contention was supported by 
Alexander Hamilton in a series of letters 
and at other times. Mr. Hamilton as- 
serted that the making of treaties was an 
essential fact incident to the existence of 
a nation ; that its proper prerogatives could 
not be exercised unless complete authority 
was given to some agency of the govern- 
ment to negotiate agreements with other 
countries and included all proper subjects 
of compacts with foreign nations. He 
argued with great force that the conten- 
tion of those who objected to the right of 
the President to make treaties with the 
concurrence of the Senate leads to an ab- 
surdity. Such a principle would interfere 
with the making of treaties of commerce, 
treaties of alliance, and treaties of peace, 
and that on a minute analysis there were 
hardly any treaties which would not in 




some way clash with these objections, and 
thus the power to make treaties granted in 
such comprehensive and indefinite terms 
and guarded with so much precaution 
would become essentially nugatory. He 
said : 

But the construction which is advanced 
would cause the legislative power to destroy 
the power of making treaties. Moreover, if 
•the power of the executive department be in- 
adequate to the making of the several kinds 
of treaties which have been mentioned, there 
is then no iH)wer in the government to make 
them, for there is not a syllable in the Consti- 
tution which authorizes either the legislative 
or judiciary departments to make a treaty 
with a foreign nation. And our Constitution 
would then exhibit the ridiculous spectacle 
of a government without a power to make 
treaties with foreign nations, a result as in- 
admissible as it is absurd, since, in fact, our 
Constitution grants the power of making 
treaties in the most explicit and ample terms 
to the President, with the advice and consent 
of the Senate. 

The same view was maintained by many 
leading men of that time. Mr, Ellsworth, 
who was later appointed Chief Justice 
and was a member of the Constitutional 
Convention, said: 

The grant of the treaty-making power is in 
these words: "The President, with the ad- 
vice and consent of the Senate, shall make 
treaties." The power goes to all kinds of 
treaties, because no exception is expressed, 
and also because no treaty-making power is 
elsewhere granted to others, and it is not to 
be supposed that the Constitution has omitted 
to vest sufficient power to make all kinds of 
treaties which have been usually made or 
which the existence or interests of the nation 
may require. 

Mr. Oliver Wolcott, Secretary of the 
Treasury in President Washington's ad- 
ministration, imder date of March 26, 
1796, wrote: 

The obligations arising from public faith 
when pledged by the representative organ of 
our nation in all foreign concerns, agreeably 
to the mode prescribed by the Constitution, 
are justly and properly declared to be laws. 
The legislative power is bound not to contra- 
vene them; on the contrary, it is bound to 
regard them and give them effect. 

Chancellor Kent sustained this theory. 
He wrote (vol. 1 of his Commentaries, 
early edition, p. 165) : 

If a treaty requires the payment of money 
or any other special act which cannot be 
done without legislation, the treaty is still 
binding on the nation, and it is the duty of 
the nation to pass the necessary laws. If 
that duty is not performed, the result is a 
breach of the treaty by the nation, just as 
much as if the breach had been an affirmative 
act by any other department of the govern- 
ment. Each nation is responsible for the 
right working of the internal system by which 
it distributes its sovereign functions, and as 
foreign nations dealing with it can not be per- 
mitted to interfere with or control these, so 
they are not to be affected or concluded by 
them to their own injury, 

Mr, Caleb Cushing, Attorney General, 
in interpreting a treaty with Great 
Britain, said on February 16, 1854: 

The conventions being a contract between 
the two nations, duly entered into and rati- 
fied by the President of the United States, by 
and with the advice and consent of the Sen- 
ate, it thereby is a law of the United States 
without any further action by the Govern- 
ment of the United States, No act of Con- 
gress is necessary to create or perfect the 
vinculum juris. The stipulations of the con- 
vention operate as a law to the courts of 
justice. State and Federal; they are of a 
character to operate of themselves as con- 
stitutionally obligatory, without the aid of 
any legislation by Congress. Such is the 
effect of the Constitution of the United 
States. A treaty, it is true, though it be as 
such a iwrtion of the supreme law of the 
land, yet may require the enactment of a 
statute to regulate the details of a process or 
of a right embraced in its stipulations; but 
such necessity, if it exists, does not affect the 
question of the legal force of the treaty per 
se. 1. A treaty constitutionally concluded 
and ratified abrogates whatever law of any 
one of the States may be inconsistent there- 

So recently as the time when the pay- 
ment of $20,000,000 to Spain under the 
treaty of 1898 was under consideration in 
the House of Eepresentatives, on February 
14, 1899, Mr. Joseph W. Bailey, a very 




thorough student of the Constitution, 
afterwards Senator, said: 

Mr. Chairman, I would like to submit this 
proposition to the gentleman from Kentucky. 
The Constitution makes the Senate and the 
President "the government" in the making 
of treaties. Now, when the President and 
the Senate make a treaty with a foreign 
nation, that foreign nation deals with the 
government. The government, as recognized 
by the Constitution, obligates itself to pay 
a given amount of money. That obligation is 
complete. The Constitution itself says that 
the Senate and the President can make the 
treaty, and when made it is the supreme law 
of the land. Every nation in the world has 
a right to deal with us on the ground that 
the Senate and the President constitute our 
government in the making of treaties. * 

Mr. Carmack, of Tennessee, afterwards 
Senator; Mr. Henry, of Texas; and Mr. 
Clayton, now a Federal judge, though all 
opposed the treaty, supported the same 

It was plainly not the intention of the 
framers of the Constitution to require 
legislative approval to insure the validity 
of treaties. On August 23, 1787, Mr. 
Gouverneur Morris moved in the Consti- 
tutional Convention to add to the section 
defining the treaty-making power the 
words — 

but no treaty shall be binding on the United 
States which is not ratified by law. 

In the vote on this proposed amendment 
Pennsylvania alone voted in the affirma- 
tive with North Carolina divided, New 
York and New Hampshire not voting. 
On September 7, James Wilson, of Penn- 
sylvania, having stated that treaties were 
to be the "laws of the land," moved to in- 
sert, after the words "by and with the 
advice and consent of the Senate,' the 
words "and the House of Eepresentatives," 
maintaining that "as treaties have the 
operation of laws they ought to have the 
sanction of laws also." This motion re- 
ceived only the support of his own State 
of Pennsylvania. A proposition that no 
rights acquired by the treaty of peace 
should be ceded without the consent of the 
legislature was not pressed to a vote. 
Also, when a proposed draft of what is 
now clause 15 of section 8, article 1, was 

reported so as to read: "To execute the 
laws of the Union, enforce treaties, sup- 
press insurrections, and repel invasions," 
the words "enforce treaties" were stricken 
out on the suggestion that they were 
superfluous, since treaties were to be laws. 
Mr. Crandall, in his review of the dis- 
cussions in the Convention, concludes: 

From these debates it appears that the 
House was excluded from participation in the 
making of treaties by the framers of the 
Constitution, with the understanding that 
treaties were to have the force of laws. 
(Crandall, p. 48.) 

One argument in favor of limiting con- 
sideration of treaties to the President and 
Senate frequently expressed in the Con- 
vention was the necessity for secrecy and 
dispatch. In the later debates on the rati- 
fication of the Constitution in State con- 
ventions and among the people it was 
taken for granted that the negotiation and 
ratification of treaties was vested exclu- 
sively in the President and the Senate, 
and this fact was one of the principal ob- 
jections to ratification. 

The second, or opposing, theory is to 
the effect that the Constitution, laws 
passed in pursuance thereof, and treaties 
are all upon an equal footing and each 
must be taken into account in determin- 
ing the validity of a treaty. These three 
fundamental features relating to govern- 
mental action constitute, as it has been 
termed, a trinity. Attention is called to 
the fact that a statute may nullify a treaty 
and a treaty may nullify a statute, the 
one last ratified or enacted becoming bind- 
ing. Under this theory, in order that a 
treaty may become operative, it must have 
the support of Congress if any action is 
contemplated upon which the legislative 
branch has power to act, such as the rais- 
ing of revenue or the making of appro- 
priations, control of the territory or prop- 
erty of the United States, regulations 
relating to commerce, provisions pertain- 
ing to the Army and Navy — in fact, upon 
any subject on which Congress has au- 
thority to legislate. This means practi- 
cally the House of Eepresentatives, as the 
approval of the Senate may be taken for 
granted if two-thirds of the Members 
present have already advised ratification. 
Foreign nations, it is alleged, must be 




held to understand the limitations upon 
the treaty-making power as interpreted 
under the Constitution, and while the 
failure to comply may create international 
complications — indeed, may even lead to 
war — the agreement is not binding upon 
the people of the United States until the 
necessary action has been taken by Con- 
gress. There is also the argument that 
certain forms of legislative action, as in 
the case of the levying of duties, must 
originate in the House of Eepresentatives. 
Mr. Jefferson was a supporter of this view. 
Perhaps the best statement of his opinions 
may be found in a letter to James Monroe 
of March 21, 1796, in which he says : 

We conceive the constitutional doctrine to 
be that though the President and Senate 
have the general power of making treaties, 
yet whenever they include in a treaty mat- 
ters confided by the Constitution to the three 
branches of legislature, an act of legislation 
will be requisite to confirm these articles, 
and that the House of Representatives, as 
one branch of the legislature, are perfectly 
free to pass the act or to refuse it, governing 
themselves by their own judgment whether it 
is for the good of their constituents to let 
the treaty go into effect or not. On the prece- 
dent now to be set will depend the future 
construction of our (Constitution and whether 
the powers of legislation shall be transferred 
from the President, Senate, and House of 
Representatives to the President and Senate, 
and Piarningo or any other Indian, Algerine, 
or other chief. 

This differs somewhat from an earlier 
expression of his recorded in the Anas 
under date of April 9, 1792, which was 
as follows: 

The President has wished to redeem our 
captives at Algiers and to make peace with 
them on paying an annual tribute. The Sen- 
ate were willing to approve this, but unwill- 
ing to have the lower House applied to pre- 
viously to furnish money ; they wished the 
President to take the money from the Treas- 
ury, or open a loan for it. * * * He 
asked me if the treaty stipulating a sum and 
ratified by him, with the advice of the Senate, 
would not be good under the Constitution and 
obligatory on the Representatives to furnish 
the money. I answered it certainly would 
and that it would be the duty of the Repre- 

sentatives to raise the money; but that they 
might decline to do what was their duty, and 
I thought it might be incautious to commit 
himself by a ratification with a foreign na- 
tion, where he might be left in the lurch in 
the execution ; it was possible, too, to con- 
ceive a treaty which it would not be their 
duty to provide for. 

He was violently opposed to the Jay 
Treaty and used the strongest expressions 
against the treaty-making power while it 
was under consideration. 

In a letter to Madison, of March 17, 
1796, he writes: 

The objects on which the President and 
Senate may exclusively act by treaty are 
much reduced, but the field in which they 
may act, with the sanction of the Legisla- 
ture, is large enough, and I see no harm in 
rendering their sanction necessary and not 
much harm in annihilating the whole treaty- 
making power except as to making peace 

In a message to the Congress in 1803, 
stating that a treaty had been concluded 
with France for the cession of Louisiana, 
Mr. Jefferson conceded that action by the 
House and Senate was necessary for the 
fulfillment of the treaty in this language : 

You will observe that some important con- 
ditions can not be carried into execution but 
with the aid of the Legislature and that time 
presses a decision on them without delay. 

Another expression by Mr. Jefferson 
was on the occasion of a treaty with an 
Indian tribe for the acquisition of lands 
for which a consideration was to be paid. 
He said : 

As the stipulations in this treaty also in- 
volve matters within the competence of both 
Houses only, it will be laid before Congress 
as soon as the Senate shall have advised 
its ratification. 

Mr. Calhoun while a Member of the 
House of Represenatives concurred in the 
same view. In a debate in January, 1816, 
he said : 

To talk of the right of this House to 
sanction treaties and at the same time to 
assert that it is under a moral obligation not 
to withhold that sanction is a solecism. No 
sound mind that understands the terms can 
possibly assent to it. I would caution the 




House, while it is extending its powers to 
cases whicli I believe do not belong to it, to 
take care lest it lose its substantial and un- 
doubted power. I would put it on its guard 
against the dangerous doctrine that it can 
in any case become a mere registering body. 
. . . The treaty-making power has many 
and powerful limits, and it will be foimd, 
when I come to discuss what those limits are, 
that it can not destroy the Constitution, or 
our personal liberty, or involve us, without 
the assent of this House, in war or grant 
away our money. 

But as Secretary of State in 1844, when 
a commercial treaty had been negotiated 
with the German States in 1843 and the 
Senate committee reported adversely on 
the ground of "want of constitutional com- 
petency" to make it, Mr. Calhoun thus 
commented on this action : 

If this be a true view of the treaty-making 
power it may be truly said that its exercise 
has been one continual series of habitual and 
uninterrupted infringements of the Consti- 
tution. From the beginning, and throughout 
the whole existence of the Federal Govern- 
ment, it has been exercised constantly on 
commerce, navigation, and other delegated 

In treating of necessary appropriations 
he said: 

It — the power — is expressly delegated to 
Congress, and yet scarcely a treaty has been 
made of any importance which does not stipu- 
late for the payment of money. 

Mr. Clay, in a discussion on a treaty 
relating to a boundary between Louisiana 
and Mexico, in 1820, expressed himself 
very vigorously against the binding power 
of treaties without the concurrence of the 
House. He said: 

The Constitution of the United States has 
not defined the precise limits of that power, 
because from the nature of it they could not 
be presented. It appears to me, however, 
that no safe American statesman will assign 
to it a boundless scope. ... If the con- 
currence of this House be not necessary in 
the cases asserted, if there be no restriction 
upon the power I am considering, it may draw 
to itself and absorb the whole power of the 
government. To contract alliances, to stipu- 
late for raising troops to be employed in a 
common war about to be waged, to grant 

subsidies, even to introduce foreign troops 
within the bosom of the country, are not in- 
frequent instances of the exercise of this 
power ; and if in all such cases the honor and 
faith of the nation are committed by the 
exclusive act of the President and Senate, the 
melancholy duty alone might be left to Con- 
gress of recording the ruin of the Republic. 

Mr. Blaine, on the occasion of a claim 
by the Chinese Government for indemnity 
under treaty provisions for Chinese killed 
within the jurisdiction of one of the 
States, said in a letter to the Chinese 
minister : 

Your observations to the effect that treaties 
form a part of the supreme law of the land 
equally with the Constitution of the United 
States is evidently based on a misconception 
of the true nature of the Constitution. . . . 
Such is the language of the Constitution, but 
it must be observed that the treaty, no less 
than the statute law, must be made in con- 
formity with the Constitution, and were a 
provision in either treaty or a law found to 
contravene the principles of the Constitu- 
tion, such provision must give way to the 
superior force of the Constitution, which is 
the organic law of the Republic, binding alike 
on the government and the nation. 

Judge Cooley, in his work on Principles 
of Constitutional Law, said: 

The Constitution imposes no restriction 
upon this power, but it is subject to the im- 
plied restriction that nothing can be done 
under it which changes the Constitution of 
the country, or robs a department of the 
government or any of the States of its con- 
stitutional authority. 

Perhaps the most extreme statement as- 
serting the limitations on the treaty-mak- 
ing power of the President and the Senate 
is contained in an article by a German 
publicist, Prof. Ernest Meier, of the Uni- 
versity of Halle, as follows : 

Congress has under the Constitution the 
right to lay taxes and imposts, as well as to 
regulate foreign trade, but the President and 
Senate, if the treaty-making power be re- 
garded as absolute, would be able to evade 
this limitation by adopting treaties which 
compel Congress to destroy its whole tariff 
system. According to the Constitution, Con- 
gress has the right to determine questions of 




naturalization, of patents, and of copyright. 
Yet, according to tlie view liere contested, the 
President and Senate by a treaty could on 
these important questions utterly destroy the 
legislative capacity of the House of Repre- 
sentatives. The Constitution gives Congress 
the control of the army. Participation in 
this control would be snatched from the 
House of Representatives by a treaty with 
a foreign power by which the United States 
would bind itself to keep in the field an army 
of a particular size. The Constitution gives 
Congress the right of declaring war ; this 
right would be illusory if the President and 
Senate could by a treaty launch the country 
into a foreign war. The power of borrowing 
money on the credit of the United States re- 
sides in Congress ; this power would cease to 
exist if the President and Senate could by 
treaty bind the country to the borrowing of 
foreign funds. By the Constitution *'no 
money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but 
in consequence of appropriations made by 
law" ; but this limitation would cease to exist 
if by a treaty the United States could be 
bound to pay money to a foreign power. 
. . . Congress would cease to be the law- 
making power as is prescribed by the Con- 
stitution ; the law-making power would be 
the President and the Senate. Such a condi- 
tion would become the more dangerous from 
the fact that treaties so adopted being on 
this particular hypothesis superior to legisla- 
tion, would continue in force until superseded 
by other treaties. Not only, therefore, would 
a Congress consisting of two Houses be made 
to give way to an oligarchy of President and 
Senate, but the decrees of this oligarchy 
when once made could only be changed lay 
concurrence of President and of senatorial 
majority of two-thirds. 

Professor von Hoist, in his work en- 
titled "Constitutional Law of the United 
States/' says: 

As to the extent of the treaty-making power 
the Constitution says nothing, but it evi- 
dently can not be unlimited. The power ex- 
ists only under the Constitution, and every 
treaty stipulation inconsistent with a provi- 
sion of the Constitution is therefore inad- 
missible and according to constitutional law 
ipso facto null and void. 

According to the third theory, while it 
is conceded that the House of Representa- 
tives can refuse to render operative the 

provisions of a treaty, it is nevertheless 
maintained that there is a moral obliga- 
tion to do so. The treaty is in the inter- 
national forum a binding agreement, and 
every consideration of good faith requires 
its fulfillment. On this subject at the 
time of the conference between the Presi- 
dent and the Foreign Relations Commit- 
tee of the Senate on August 19, 1919, 
President Wilson contended that Article 
10 of the Versailles Treaty constituted a 
very grave and solemn moral obligation. 
He said : 

It is a moral, not a legal, obligation. 

When asked by Senator Knox if in case 
of external aggression against some power 
which could not be repelled except by 
force of arms we would be under any 
legal obligation to participate, he an- 
swered : 

No, sir; but we would be under an abso- 
lutely compelling moral obligation. 

Senator — late President — Harding 
asked him as to the scope of the obliga- 
tions proposed to be incurred, and Presi- 
dent Wilson replied: 

There is a national good conscience in such 
a matter. . . . Now, a moral obligation 
is of course superior to a legal obligation, 
and, if I may say so, has a greater binding 

And during the presidential campaign 
of 1920 President Harding said, in speak- 
ing of the right to refuse to perform a 
treaty obligation : 

Technically, of course — 

Congress — 

could do so. Morally, with equal certainty, it 
could not do so, nor would it ever do so. The 
American people would never permit a re- 
pudiation of a debt of honor. No Congress 
would ever dare make this nation appear as 
a welcher, as it would appear and would be 
in such an event before the eyes of the world. 

Judge Cooley, when asserting that the 
House of Representatives may in its dis- 
cretion at any time refuse to give assent to 
legislation necessary to give a treaty effect, 




This would be an extreme measure, but it 
is conceivable that a case might arise in 
which a resort to it would be justified. 

The facts which militate against the "un- 
qualified admission of the first theory are 
perfectly plain. There are three depart- 
ments in the Federal Government. There 
are two legislative bodies. In the per- 
formance of the conditions of a treaty 
action by the House in numerous cases 
is essential. That action may be withheld. 
The different legislative bodies or the de- 
partments of the government may clash, 
but the question arises whether the omis- 
sion or refusal of the House to act differs 
from failure to act by an official or by 
Congress in other activities of the govern- 
ment: The President after the ratifica- 
tion of a treaty might decide not to carry 
it out. It is conceivable he might omit 
to enforce a law passed by Congress. 

President Jackson is said to have re- 
marked of a decision of the Supreme 
Court : 

John Marshall has made a decision, now 
let him enforce it. 

Congress might refuse to make appro- 
priations for the established salaries of 
Federal officials, or might decline to take 
action in pursuance of the laws of the 
land. Committees of the House such as 
those on naval or military affairs might 
recommend substantive legislation which 
afterwards would become law, and the 
Committee on Apropriations might post- 
pone or refuse the insertion of the neces- 
sary amounts in appropriation bills. The 
whole theory of the machinery of gov- 
ernment contemplates the possibility of 
failure in co-operation, or in the per- 
formance of duties by different organs of 
the government. That, however, does not 
render laws or treaties less obligatory, and 
it must be reiterated that there are no 
obligations of a higher type than those 
which pertain to our relations with other 

Acceptance of the second theory is 
equally out of the question as contrary to 
the intention of the framers of the Con- 
stitution and as creating a situation which 
would hopelessly embarrass us in our 
foreign relations. Stated briefly, there is, 
in the enforcement of treaties, a possible 

conflict between international and mu- 
nicipal law. Which shall prevail? Opin- 
ions expressed upon this subject have not 
been free from confusion. But if we 
expect to maintain good faith in our deal- 
ings with other nations and to secure the 
fulfillment of promises made by them, 
every consideration of national interest as 
well as of national honor demands strict 
compliance with agreements or treaties 
made in conformity with the provisions 
of the Constitution. 

The question of the function of the 
House of Eepresentatives in passing upon 
treaties has been repeatedly under discus- 
sion. The first instance was on the oc- 
casion of the Jay Treaty. This treaty 
was held to require action by Congress 
and on March 24, 1796, a resolution was 
carried by a vote of 62 to 37 requesting 
President Washington to lay before the 
House copies of the instructions to the 
minister who had negotiated the treaty 
with Great Britain, together with the cor- 
respondence and other documents relating 
thereto. President Washington on the 
30th of March, 1796, in the message from 
which quotation has already been made, 
declined and a heated debate ensued. Two 
resolutions were voted upon, one to the 
effect that the treaty was highly objection- 
able and another that it was objectionable. 
The vote on both of these was a tie, 48 to 
48 and 49 to 49, respectively, the deciding 
vote being cast against the resolutions by 
the Speaker. A resolution to carry the 
treaty into effect was passed by a vote of 
51 to 48. 

In 1803, when Mr. Jefferson transmit- 
ted his message asking for an appropria- 
tion for the purchase of Louisiana, a 
similar resolution asking for papers were 
adopted. There was a difference in party 
alignment in the support and opposition 
to this resolution. It was rejected. Simi- 
lar discussion occurred upon the commer- 
cial treaty of 1815 with Great Britain. 
Among other provisions, this treaty abol- 
ished discriminating duties. It was con- 
tended that no commercial regulation 
could be made by treaty without the con- 
currence of Congress. 

After the purchase of Alaska in 1867, 
which required a payment of $7,200,000 
in gold, there was opposition to making 
the appropriation on two grounds; first, 




that the Territory was worthless and it 
was a waste of money^ and, second, that 
the treaty for the acquisition should not 
have been enacted without the action of 
the House. This led to a conference re- 
port, the House asserting its rights in the 
premises, and the Senate finally made the 
concession that under some circumstances 
treaty stipulations can not be carried into 
full force and effect until the House shall 
take action. 

Again, in 1887 the question was before 
the House of Eepresentatives upon the 
question of an extension by a later treaty 
of the reciprocity treaty of 1875 with the 
Hawaiian Islands, which provided for the 
free importation of rice, unrefined sugar, 
and other products. The first treaty was 
not to take effect until a law to carry it 
into operation should be passed by Con- 
gress. The second omitted this provision. 
A very able report was prepared on this 
subject by Mr. J. Eandolph Tucker, which 
is printed as Report No. 4177, Forty-ninth 
Congress, second session. This is monu- 
mental in scholarship and strength of rea- 
soning, and sets forth as clearly as any 
document the arguments favoring the 
necessary concurrence of the House of 
Eepresentatives in treaties whenever modi- 
fication of duties, appropriations, or sup- 
plemental legislation are required. 

The appropriation of $20,000,000 for 
the purchase of the Philippines in the 
treaty with Spain, which was ratified by 
the Senate on February 6, 1899, was 
adopted, and but slight opposition arose. 
Another treaty of recent date, under 
which the amount promised was appro- 
priated without substantial opposition in 
the House, was that of November 18, 1903, 
with Panama. This treaty contained an 
agreement that $10,000,000 should be 
paid for the necessary rights acquired for 
the building of the canal and for further 
payments of $250,000 per annum begin- 
ning nine years later. These later pay- 
ments have been appropriated without 
question. A substantial argument for the 
binding force of treaties is found in this 
provision for deferred installments of 
$250,000 per year. How could Congress 
have appropriated for these installments 
in advance? On the other hand, such a 
provision was an essential part of the 
treaty. Very recently the treaty with 
Colombia, involving the appropriation of 

$20,000,000, was regarded as conclusive, 
and no objection was made in the House 
to an appropriation of $5,000,000 for the 
first payment required. 

It has been said that every President 
from John Adams down to date, in 
treaties requiring appropriations, has 
asked Congress for action, but the ques- 
tion may well be raised whether messages 
asking for appropriations have been in 
the nature of a request or of an injunction 
to perform a duty. 

President Johnson, in notifying Con- 
gress of the treaty for the purchase of 
Alaska, said, in a message of July 6, 1867 : 

The attention of Congress is invited to tlie 
subject of an appropriation for this payment. 

And President Grant, in a message on 
the 8th of March, 1870, transmitted a 
communication from the Secretary of the 
Interior relative to what he termed the 
obligation of Congress to make the neces- 
sary appropriations to carry out the Indian 
treaties made by what is known as the 
Peace Commission of 1867. Mr. Crandall 
in his work on treaties, page 179, enu- 
merates some 30 treaties carrying appro- 
priations, all of which have been ap- 
proved by the House. He adds that in no 
case has the necessary amount been re- 
fused, and that since 1868 little question 
has been raised. In fact, there has never 
been a failure to pass the necessary legis- 

It will be seen from these facts that in 
recent years the authority of the President 
and the Senate in the making of treaties 
has aroused little question. 

Another class of treaties should be 
named in which a condition has been in- 
serted in the treaty itself to the effect that 
duties should not be changed without the 
concurrence of Congress. There is a 
considerable number of these. They cre- 
ate a condition, and notice is given to 
foreign countries that the agreement is 
not binding until Congress acts. In this 
regard there has been a marked difference 
between treaties relating to duties and 
those which require appropriations. In 
almost every treaty, beginning in 1854, 
with the treaty with Great Britain for 
reciprocity with Canada, followed by that 
with Hawaii in 1875, and then by the 
treaty with Cuba in 1902, in all of which 
there were regulations as to duties, the 




provision is inserted that the treaty must 
be aproved by Congress or by the appro- 
priate authorities. Section 3 of the 
tariff act of 1897 authorized the President 
to enter into reciprocal commercial con- 
ventions with other countries. The pro- 
posed reciprocity treaty with Canada in 
1911, which failed because of the non- 
concurrence of Canada, was submitted to 
the Congress for approval. 

Some Judicial Decisions Would Seem to 
Limit the Binding Force of Treaties 

As regards action by the Supreme 
Court, it must be understood that the 
judiciary have to do merely with interpre- 
tations in accordance with the action of 
the legislative and executive departments 
of the United States. With the question 
of observance of good faith they have 
nothing to do. This fact was most clearly 
stated in what is called the Cherokee To- 
bacco case (11 Wall., pp. 616, 620, and 
621), to the effect that an act of Congress 
may supersede a prior treaty and a treaty 
may supersede a prior act of Congress. 
This was a very strong case. A treaty 
with the Cherokee Nation exempted the 
produce of the farmers from taxation. 
Afterwards an internal-revenue tax was 
levied on tobacco, and it was held not 
only that the law imposing the tax applied 
to the Cherokee Nation but that it an- 
nulled the previous treaty. The treaty 
was made in 1866 and the act levying the 
tax was passed in 1868. 

As a result of its distinctive position 
the Supreme Court has repeatedly stated 
that treaties must be in accordance with 
the Constitution, and while as regards pri- 
vate rights of individuals under treaties 
it has frequently asserted that their con- 
struction is the peculiar province of the 
judiciary, the court has limited its deci- 
sions upon political questions. The gen- 
eral scope of the treaty-making power 
from the standpoint of the judiciary is no- 
where better stated than by Chief Justice 
Marshall in the case of Foster v. Neilson 
(2 Peters, 233, 314) : 

A treaty is in its nature a contract be- 
tween two nations, not a legislative act. It 
does not generally effect, of itself, the object 
to be accomplished, especially so far as its 
operation is infraterritorial, but is carried 

into execution by the sovereign power of the 
respective parties to the instrument. 

In the United States a different principle 
is established. Our Constitution declares a 
treaty to be the law of the land. It is, conse- 
quently, to be regarded in courts of justice 
as equivalent to an act of the legislature 
whenever it operates of itself without the aid 
of any legislative provision. But when the 
terms of the stipulation import a contract, 
when either of the parties engages to perform 
a particular act, the treaty addresses itself 
to the political, not the judicial, department ; 
and the legislature must execute the contract 
before it can become a rule for the court. 

It has been asserted by the Supreme 
Court, as in United States v. Arredondo 
(6 Peters, 691), that a treaty is in its 
nature a contract between two nations and 
the legislature must execute the contract 
before it can become a rule for the court. 

That treaties are subject to such acts as 
Congress may pass for the enforcement, 
modification, or repeal is maintained in 
Edye v. Kobertson (112 U. S. 580), in 
which last case Justice MiUer says : 

The Constitution gives it — 

A treaty — 

no superiority over an act of Congress . . . 
nor is there anything in its essential char- 
acter, or in the branches of the government by 
which the treaty is made, which gives it this 
superior sanctity. A treaty is made by the 
President and Senate. Statutes are made by 
the President, the Senate, and the House of 

On this subject Justice Field says in 
One hundred and thirty-third United 
States, 266, 267— 

The treaty power, as e'xpressed in the Con- 
stitution, is in terms unlimited except by 
those restraints which are found in that in- 
strument against the action of the govern- 
ment or of its departments, and those arising 
from the nature of the government itself and 
that of the States. It would not be contended 
that it extends so far as to authorize what 
the Constitution forbids, or a change in the 
character of the government or in that of 
one of the States, or a cession of any portion 
of the territory of the latter without its con- 
sent. But with these exceptions, it is not 
perceived that there is any limit to the ques- 




tions which can be adjusted touching any 
matter which is properly the subject of nego- 
tiations with a foreign country. 

One of the latest discussions in which 
the question of the duties of Congress to 
take steps for the enforcement of a treaty 
is in the case of De Lima v. Bidwell (182 
U. S. 1). By the treaty of Paris, Porto 
Eico was ceded to the United States. 
After the treaty had been duly ratified 
goods were imported into the United 
States which if brought from a foreign 
country would be subject to a duty. It 
was maintained by the government that 
until legislation was enacted for the ad- 
ministration of the island and a recogni- 
tion of its position as a Territory of the 
United States, duties must be imposed 
as in the case of all importations from a 
foreign country. This case was elabo- 
rately discussed, and by a majority the 
court decided that Porto Rico became do- 
mestic territory on the ratification of the 
treaty and no further action by Congress 
was necessary to make it such. 

In the majority opinion, on page 198, 
Justice Brown said: 

We express no opinion as to whether Con- 
gress is bound to appropriate the money to 
pay for it. 'lliis has been much discussed by 
writers upon constitutional law, but it is not 
necessary to consider it in this case, as Con- 
gress made prompt appropriation of the 
money stipulated in the treaty. 

He refuted the contention that ceded 
territory might be treated in every par- 
ticular except for tariff purposes as domes- 
tic territory, and that until Congress 
enacts otherwise it would remain a foreign 
country. Yet the Supreme Court has sus- 
tained treaties contravening State laws, 
for illustration, relieving aliens from dis- 
abilities under State laws pertaining to 
land ownership; also in annulling dis- 
criminatory taxes upon foreigners. Laws 
of States and municipal ordinances under 
State authority discriminating against 
foreign immigrants protected by treaties 
have been declared void. The same is true 
of the enforcement of treaties superseding 
or contrary to Federal laws. 

There is a collateral question, which as- 
sumes especial importance, of the right of 
the Federal Government to assume juris- 
diction for the protection of aliens under 

treaty rights. On this subject President 
Harrison, in his message of December 9, 
1891, said. 

It would, I believe, be entirely competent 
for Congress to make offenses against the 
treaty rights of foreigners domiciled in the 
United States cognizable in the Federal 

Presidents McKinley and Roosevelt sus- 
tained this contention in messages; also 
President Taft, in both his inaugural 
address and his annual message of De- 
cember, 1910. He also expresses himself 
to the same effect in an address to the 
members of the American Society of In- 
ternational Law, in April, 1910, saying: 

1 can not suppose that the Federal Con- 
stitution was drawn by men who proposed 
to put in the hands of one set of authorities 
the power to promise and then withhold from 
them the means of fulfilling them. 

In a report to the Lake Mohonk Con- 
ference of May 26, 1911, Senator Root 
with Messrs. Baldwin and Kirchwey say: 

After careful deliberation we have come 
unanimously to the conclusion that the power 
to make good its treaty obligations is now 
vested in the government under the Con- 

Extended references on this subject are 
contained in chapter 17 of Mr. CrandalFs 
book on Treaties. 

It is said that there are two classes of 
treaties, executed and executory. The 
fact is practically all treaties are execu- 
tory. They do not pertain to something 
that has been done. They pertain to some- 
thing that is to be done. They constitute 
a contract which is to be carried into 
effect, and is quite as binding as any 
agreements, so we can not, in judging of 
the treaty-making power, give any especial 
weight to this distinction. When the 
treaty is negotiated by the President and 
has the advice and consent of two-thirds 
of the Senate, either it is complete or not 
complete. There is no time when, like 
Mahomet's coffin, it is suspended in the 
air. There must be a time when those 
with whom we are dealing know whether 
minds have met. How desirable that is, 
because if another nation knows that the 
treaty must be mulled over by at least two 




legislative bodies, that country by its rep- 
resentatives will not make the concessions 
to which it would otherwise agree. There 
will be certain reservations made to meet 

I can not agree to the argument just 
advanced that a treaty should be submit- 
ted to the House of Representatives. 
What would the House do with it ? When 
would it be submitted ? When the parties 
first meet for negotiations, should the 
President transmit the subject under con- 
sideration and ask for instructions, al- 
though this House has no power to make 
treaties ? Should he transmit it when the 
first draft is completed? Should he send 
it here before or after it is approved by 
the Senate ? There is no possible warrant 
for such a course. What good would it 
do? What could happen except that it 
would create confusion and interfere not 
merely with the orderly course of proceed- 
ings but with securing a favorable result. 
I recognize very clearly that it is a bit un- 
gracious for a Member of the House to in 
any way decry its powers in treaty making. 
In view of our larger relations with other 
countries I regard it as one reason why 
this House is at a disadvantage, that it 
does not have more to do with foreign 
relations, and I am always loath in any 
way to say anything which would in the 
least diminish the powers and prerogatives 
of this House. Mr. Fisher Ames, the elo- 
quent orator, expressed himself very aptly 
upon the desire of a legislative body to 
maintain its prerogatives. He said: 

The self-love of an individual is not warmer 
in its sense or more constant in its action 
than the self-love of an assembly — that 
jealous affection which a body of men is 
always found to bear toward its own pre- 
rogatives and powers. I will not condemn 
this passion. 

Following him, no more shall I. But 
there is a point where our powers have 
a limit. 

I may add that I can not agree with the 
argument which has been made on this 
subject by the gentleman from Virginia 
that a treaty can not override a statute of 
the State in regard to the rights of aliens. 
In addition to the general statements I 
have made, reference may be had to the 
case of Ware against Hylton (3 Dal., p. 

199), decided in 1796 and repeatedly re- 
ferred to with approval. Anyone who will 
read that decision must come to a different 
conclusion from that which the gentleman 
has expressed. That involved the question 
of a British subject. 

In 1846 we made a treaty with New 
Granada guaranteeing the neutrality of 
the Isthmus of Panama, and after the 
Boxer rebellion of 1900 we joined with 
other powers and agreed to maintain a 
military force at Peking and at Tientsin 
in China, and those forces are there until 
this day. In 1904 we guaranteed the in- 
dependence of Panama. At one time our 
warships were sent there to carry out 
treaty provisions. 

Let us look at the other side of the 
shield, that in regard to treaties of arbi- 
tration and for the promotion of peace. 
In the Rush-Bagot agreement of 1817 we 
agreed that there should be maintained 
a warship of not more than 100 tons on 
each of the lakes, Champlain and Ontario, 
and two on the "upper" lakes, and no 
more. Each of these ships, as I recall it, 
was to carry one 18-pounder gun. We 
did more than that. We agreed to scrap, 
as in this treaty, the rest of our naval 
armament upon those lakes, and President 
Monroe issued a proclamation in 1817 
saying that the treaty, or arrangement as 
he termed it, having been approved by the 
Senate, was of full force and effect. 

He did not ask the concurrence of the 
House. We have entered into arbitration 
treaties almost without number, and it is 
the most splendid phase in all of our 
diplomacy. I need go no further than to 
refer to the so-called Bryan treaties, some 
20 in number. Those treaties provide that 
when a dispute arises between our country 
and any other which can not be settled 
by the ordinary processes of diplomacy the 
questions of law and fact shall be sub- 
mitted to a commission of inquiry, and no 
step looking toward war shall be taken 
until that commission reports. Will some 
member come in here and say that those 
treaties are invalid because they disable 
the House of Representatives from send- 
ing bristling bayonets into the field? 
They are binding on the country, and they 
should be binding. Suppose Mr. Hughes 
while he was speaking before that great 
gathering and was received with so much 




acclaim had said, "We are moving to stop 
this mad race of naval expansion right 
now." "The time for action has come," 
as he did actually say. "We will scrap 
certain of our ships; we will abate our 
naval program. We will take hold of every 
golden chain to bind us in amity and co- 
operation with those nations between 
which and us there has been friction." 
These were inspiring thoughts, but sup- 
pose he had punctuated his remarks by 
saying, "All this can be done, provided 
the House of Representatives comes to the 
conclusion it is not an interference with 
a bill they passed in 1916 for an ambitious 
naval program." What kind of a position 
would have been occupied before the na- 
tions of the earth if such a postscript had 
been added? And in this day, this day 
when the threat of chaos still hangs over 
the world, I most earnestly desire to im- 
press upon the members of this House the 
importance of contracting in the easiest 
and readiest way any treaty that looks 
toward peace with nations. We no longer 
can say, as did a distinguished United 
States Senator, "What have we to do with 
abroad" ? 

Our relations extend to the remotest 
bounds. Whatever happens in Petrograd 
or in Tokyo or in far-off Bagdad is of 
the utmost interest to the United States. 
Our trade relations, our social relations, 
all those things which make for the better- 
ment of humanity, are bound up with the 
hopes and fears of all the peoples of the 

earth. The most ardent hope is that the 
movement for peace may be a mighty pro- 
cession, ever moving onward. Gentlemen 
of the committee, it is not altogether a 
constitutional proposition which concerns 
us, though I think these treaties are 
clearly binding under the Constitution. 
If we concede it is within the power of 
this House to stand in the way and stop 
progress toward peace, we surely will 
never do it. I hope this bill will pass by 
a unanimous vote. This question of treat- 
ies is of the utmost consequence to us 
in our international relations, which are 
assuming ever-increasing, almost supreme, 
importance among our national policies. 
We will not neglect the home life of the 
nation; we will not neglect the welfare 
of the weak and of the struggling. We 
will endeavor in all our legislation to hold 
the scales equally and to devise such laws 
as, like gracious drops of dew, shall spread 
their blessings all abroad. 

But there is need of the broadest vision. 
Our larger outlook is beyond the windows 
which look out upon a narrow landscape. 
It is upon the whole world, and in the 
making of treaties we should define clearly 
where that power rests. And may the 
time never come when in pursuance of any 
constitutional theory or any policy of ob- 
struction this House shall for one moment 
stand in the way of that great mission 
which we have to perform for peace, for 
good will, and for an advancing civiliza- 





Department of State Replies to 
Three Questions Submitted by 
Secretary of League of Nations 

(U. 8. Daily, Dec. 20) 

The Department of State has addressed 
a communication to the Secretary General 
of the League of Nations, Sir Eric Drum- 
mond, which states that the United States 

cannot agree to the advisability of the codi- 
fication of three questions of international 

These three questions, according to infor- 
mation made public by the Department of 
State on December 19, are : Communication 
of Judicial and Extra-judicial Acts on Penal 
Matters ; the Legal Position and Functions of 
Consuls; the Revision of the Classification 
of Diplomatic Agents. 

The full text of the announcement by the 
Department of State follows: 




The following communication was sent on 
December 16, 1927, by the Department to the 
Secretary General of the League of Nations 
through the American Legation at Berne: 

"The Secretary General of the League of 
Nations, with a communication dated June 7, 
1927, was good enough to transmit to the 
Secretary of State of the United States cer- 
tain questionnaires and reports prepared by 
the Committee of Experts for the Progres- 
sive Codification of International Law and 
to request the opinion of the Government of 
the United States as to whether the regula- 
tion by international agreement of the sub- 
jects treated in the questionnaires, having 
regard both to their general aspects and the 
specific points mentioned in the question- 
naires, is desirable and realizable in the near 

Use of Letters Rogatory 

"Question No. 8: With respect to the 
amended draft convention on this subject 
submitted with the report of the subcom- 
mittee of the Committee of Experts, it may 
be stated that the taking of the testimony 
relating to criminal cases in foreign countries 
by the use of letters rogatory, with which 
Article I of the amended draft deals, is a 
process for which no provision has been made 
by the legislation of the Federal Government 
and one which under the system prevailing 
in the United States can be employed, if at 
all, only pursuant to the laws of the several 
States. It is not deemed advisable to make 
commitments by international convention to 
change the existing practice in this regard 
prevailing in the United States. Moreover, 
evidence obtained in foreign countries 
through letters rogatory could not be used 
in criminal cases in the United States, since 
under the Constitution the accused must be 
confronted by the witnesses against him. 

"With respect to the second article of 
the revised draft it may be stated that the 
Government of the United States is not pre- 
pared to commit itself to serve summonses 
emanating with foreign courts on witnesses 
or experts resident in the United States or 
to surrender persons in custody, except 
through the process of extradition. 

"It is the view of the Government of the 
United States that the matter of the sur- 
render of exhibits dealt with in the third 
article of the amended draft convention can 
be adequately provided for in extradition 
treaties. Indeed, provisions for the sur- 
render of property in possession of fugitives 
are contained in some of the extradition 
treaties of the United States. The list of 
treaties appended to the report, as examples 
of judicial co-operation, indicates that the 
subject as heretofore treated is closely re- 
lated to extradition. 

"While conventions on the subject of ju- 
dicial co-operation doubtless serve a useful 
purpose among cotintries in close geographic 
proximity to each other, it is not apparent 
that uniform application of such agreements 
is necessary. 

Agreement on Courts 

"Question N^o. 9: The experience of the 
Government of the United States has not 
revealed any considerable uncertainty re- 
garding the legal position and functions of 
consuls. Furthermore, this matter has been 
the subject of numerous provisions in bi- 
lateral treaties. It is the view of the Govern- 
ment of the United States that no compelling 
necessity exists for the treatment of this 
subject by a general international convention. 

"Question No. 10: The Government of the 
United States does not consider it desirable 
to revise the classifications of diplomatic 
agents as proposed. No circumstances or 
conditions demonstrating the desirability of 
changing the classification have been re- 
vealed, nor is there reason to expect that the 
purposed change, if made, would effect any 
material improvement. 

"The Government of the United States does 
not consider that the regulation by multi- 
lateral international agreement of questions 
8 and 9 or the change of classification pro- 
posed in question 10 is desirable or attain- 
able in the near future. 

"Question No. 11: The Government of the 
United States is inclined to the view that an 
international agreement on the subject of 
competence of the courts in certain classes 
of cases against foreign States, would serve 
a useful purpose, and would therefore be 
desirable, and that there should be no in- 
superable obstacle to the concluding of an 
agreement on that subject. 

"The Government of the United States 
thanks the Secretary General for the re- 
port on 'effect of the most-favored-nation 
clause, forwarded with the communication of 
June 7." 


(Note. — Following is the text of (I) Pact 
of guarantee and neutrality between Russia 
and Persia, signed at Moscow on October 1, 
1927, and (II) Note addressed on the same 
day by the Persian Minister of Foreign Af- 
fairs to the Soviet Commission for Foreign 

I. Text of the Treaty 

Article 1 

The mutual relations between Persia and 
the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics con- 
tinue to be based on the Treaty of February 
26, 1921, all articles and stipulations of 
which remain in force and the authority of 
which extends over the entire territory of 
the Union of Socialist Republics. 

Article 2 

Each of the contracting parties undertakes 
to abstain from every attack and aggressive 



action against the other party and from ad- 
vancing its armed forces into the territory 
of the other party. 

In case, however, one of the contracting 
parties should be attacked by one or several 
third powers, the other contracting party 
undertakes to remain neutral during the en- 
tire conflict, which neutrality the party at- 
tacked must not violate regardless of all 
strategic, tactical or political considerations 
or advantages that might accrue to it from 
such violation. 

Article 3 

Each of the contracting parties undertakes 
not to participate either de facto or formally 
in political alliances or agreements directed 
against the security of the other party, on 
land or at sea, or against its integrity, in- 
dependence or sovereignty. 

The two contracting parties, moreover, re- 
nounce all participation in economic boycotts 
and blockades oi-ganized by third powers and 
directed against one of the contracting 

Article 4 

In view of the obligations assumed under 
articles 4 and 5 of the Treaty of February 
26, 1921, the two contracting parties, desiring 
not to interfere in the internal affairs of 
each other and to abstain from carrying on 
propaganda or struggle against the govern- 
ment of the other, will strictly forbid their 
officials to carry on such activity on the ter- 
ritory of the other contracting party. 

If nationals of one of the contracting 
parties residing on the territory of the other 
party should carry on propaganda or struggle 
prohibited by the authorities of the latter 
party, the government of this territory will 
have the right to put an end to their activity 
and to apply to them the legally established 

Likewise, in conformity with the stipula- 
tions of the above-mentioned articles, the two 
contracting parties undertake not to support 
and not to allow on their respective terri- 
tories the formation or the activity of: (1) 
organizations or groups, regardless of the 
name by which they are known, whose object 
is to struggle against the government of the 
other contracting party by means of violence, 
insurrections or attacks; (2) organizations 
or groups which arrogate to themselves the 
r61e of the government of all or part of the 

territory of the other contracting party and 
whose object is likewise to struggle against 
the government of the other contracting 
party by the above-mentioned means, to vio- 
late its peace and security or to attempt 
against its territorial integrity. 

Inspired by the above-mentioned principles, 
the two contracting parties undertake to 
prohibit the formation on, as well as the 
entrance into, their territories of armed 
forces, arms, ammunitions, and all kinds of 
military supplies intended for the above- 
mentioned organizations. 

Article 5 

The two contracting parties undertake to 
settle by peaceful means, suitable to the oc- 
casion, all disputes that might arise between 
them and which could not be settled through 
the ordinary diplomatic channels. 

Article 6 
Outside of the obligations undertaken by 
the two contracting parties in virtue of the 
present agreement, the two parties reserve to 
themselves entire freedom of action in their 
international relations. 

Article 7 

The px-esent agreement is concluded for a 
period of three years and shall be submitted 
at the earliest possible date to the approval 
and ratification of the legislative bodies of 
the two parties, after which it shall enter 
into force. 

The exchange of ratifications shall take 
place at Teheran within one month following 
the ratification. 

Upon expiration of the first established 
period, the agreement shall be considered as 
automatically prolonged each time for the 
peri 'd of one year unless one of the contract- 
ing parties notifies its intention of denounc- 
ing it. In the latter case the agreement shall 
remain in force for a period of six months 
after the notice of denunciation made by one 
of the contracting parties. 

Article 8 

The present agreement shall be drawn up 
in the Russian, Persian, and French lan- 
guages in three authentic copies for each of 
the contracting parties. 

For purposes of interpretation, all three 
texts are authentic. In case of any dispute 
as to interpretation, the French text shall be 
regarded as authentic. 



II. Note of the Persian Minister of Foreign 

Moscow, October 1, 1927. 
Mb. People's Commissar: 

At the time of the signature of the pact of 
guarantee and neutrality signed at this date 
between Persia and the Union of Soviet 
Socialist Republics, I have the honor to in- 
form you of the following: 

Whereas the Persian Government always 
endeavors to fulfill entirely all its obligations 
voluntarily, it signs the present agreement 
with the desire to respect sincerely all the 
obligations deriving from it, and, according 
to the conviction of the Persian Government, 
the above-mentioned obligations are in no 
way contrary to the obligations of the 
Persian Government toward the League of 

The Persian Government declares to the 
Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist 
Republics that the Persian Government shall 
also respect and fulfill all its obligations as 
a member of the League of Nations. 

I have the honor, etc., 

Ali Gholi Khan Ansari. 

News in Brief 

An Association of Mutual Co-operation 
for American Concord has been organized in 
Buenos Aires. Its purposes are to co-operate 
with "all steps initiated for the establishment 
of American concord, and to combat preju- 
dices, errors, imperialism, and injustice 
which stand in the way" ; to publish a maga- 
zine in Spanish, Portuguese, and English; to 
found a news service which shall be gratis, 
non-sensational, and impartial ; to foster pub- 
lic meetings and lectures in accord with its 
general purpose ; and to foster the founding 
of affiliated associations to help in mutual 
understanding and fraternal relations. 

The Government of Paraguay has signed 
a contract with a French company for a tri- 
weekly air service between Asuncion and 
Buenos Aires, with stops at five or more 

ports along the Parana River, a distance of 
about 850 miles. 

The foety-eighth session of the Council 

of the League of Nations ended December 12, 
after the harmonious settlement of several 
trying problems. 

Education of public opinion, publicity on 
all international issues, and establishment of 
a high moral standard for international deal- 
ings were advocated as the most effective 
means of insuring the world peace, by Jere- 
miah Smith, Jr., before the Academy of Po- 
litical Science, in New York City, November 
18. Mr. Smith, who was the Commissioner- 
General for the financial reorganization of 
Hungary, further stated that laws and reso- 
lutions to outlaw war would not be enough. 
A well-informed public opinion on interna- 
tional affairs should be the objective of every 
peace society. 

The State Department has announcbi) 
that hereafter a committee composed of 
officials from the State Department and 
the Agricultural Department will have con- 
trol of decisions regarding embargoes on 
plant and animal products. This decision 
follows long negotiations of the Argentine 
Embassy, which resulted in the practical lift- 
ing of Agricultural Department embargoes on 
grapes and chilled meat and modifying that 
on alfalfa seed. 

Professor Anzilotti of Italy has been 
elected President of the World Court for the 
term 1928-30, succeeding Dr. Huber, of 
Switzerland. John Bassett Moore, of the 
United States, was elected member of the 
Chamber for transit and communication 
cases and substitute member in that for 
labor cases. 

An International House at the Univer- 
sity of California, Berkeley, will be erected 
by John D. Rockefeller, Jr. It will be a large 
and modern dormitory, planned to accom- 
modate 300 foreign students and 200 Ameri- 
cans each year. It will be similar to the 
International House in New York City. Per- 
manent friendships, resulting in a strong 
influence for international peace and under- 
standing, is expected to grow from the con- 
tacts formed in these houses. 




The Bow School of London Invited, this 
year, a group of Frencli boys and their 
masters to spend three weeks with them in a 
summer camp for study and out-of-door life. 
This was in return for hospitalities extended 
by French schools to the English boys on 
their holiday trips to France. 

The Intebnational Radio - Telbgbaph 
Conference completed on November 22 the 
formulation of an international treaty gov- 
erning the uses of radio in international 
communications. The conference had been 
in plenary session for seven weeks. The 
convention decided to meet in Spain in 1932. 

The Sixth International Conference of 
American States, to be held in Havana, 
Cuba, January 16, is of immediate interest to 
the Western World. It is reported that 
President Coolidge and Secretary Kellogg 
will attend the conference. The United 
States delegation, headed by Charles Evans 
Hughes, will be made up of James Brown 
Scott, Henry P. Fletcher, Oscar Underwood, 
Dwight Morrow, Morgan O'Brien, Leo S. 
Rowe, and Ray Lyman Wilbur. 

The numbek of unemployed in Germany 
has decreased from about 3,000,000 a year 
ago to 100,000, according to a statement of 
Dr. Jacob Gould Schurman, American Am- 
bassador to Germany. This has been made 
possible largely through foreign loans, 
especially from American sources. In former 
days the army alone kept 700,000 men from 
productive work. 

The Ratification of the Lausanne 
Treaty between the United States and 
Turkey will be the chief purpose of the mis- 
sion to this country of Ahmed Moukhtar Bey, 
new Turkish Ambassador, The Ambassador 
assumed his post on November 29. 

vened November 24, by Mrs. Baldwin, in 
support of the World Alliance for Promot- 
ing International Friendship Through the 
Churches, was addressed by the Archbishop 
of Canterbury, Lord Balfour, and others. 

A SERIES OF LEX!TURE8 On international re- 
lations, given under the auspices of the 
Social Sciences Faculty of the University of 
Washington, began October 18 and are to 
continue fortnightly for the remainder of the 
year. The theme for the autumn quarter 
was "Problems of the Pacific." 

The Social Studies Section of the Penn- 
sylvania State Education Association met at 
Lancaster on December 29 and considered 
the topic "Promoting international under- 
standing through teaching the social studies." 


aviation, to meet next December, was sug- 
gested by President Coolidge in a letter from 
the White House addressed to the Civil 
Aeronautics Conference, which held a five- 
day meeting closing December 9. 


Imperialism and World Politics. By 
Parker Thomas Moon. Pp. 566 and index. 
Masmillan, New York, 1927. Price, $3,50. 

Believing that the ideas and interests pro- 
ductive of the war in 1914 had caused many 
previous wars, and that they are in large 
measure still working, Mr. Moon has sought 
for the principle underlying these ideas. 
Imperialism seems to be the best word avail- 
able to designate the main operative prin- 
ciple in the last century and the first quarter 
of this one. 

The book is analytical and historical rather 
than controversial. The author candidly 
says that he sees no immediate solution of 
the problems he states, though an enlightened 
public opinion and a better working inter- 
national co-operation would greatly hasten 
a solution. 

He does not define imperialism, but it is 
evident from his use of the word that he 
takes it in an elastic sense. In the case ot 
the relations of the United States with Latin 
America, for instance, economic or financial 
control, or even pressure, is called imperial- 
ism. At the same time he credits public 
opinion in this country with the belief that 
actual seizure of territory is akin to theft. 

There are many studies in the book par- 
ticularly discriminating. That of Cecil 
Rhodes in relation to South Africa is one 




useful interpretation. The battle of conces- 
sions in the Far East is another ; especially 
good is its unprejudiced exposition of the 
part the United States has played in the 

But of real moment to us just now is the 
study of Pan-Americanism, It should help 
the North American reader to understand 
that the proper position for the United States 
ought to be the acceptance of Latin Ameri- 
can nations as our associates rather than our 

Unlike many serious studies of our times, 
this book does not focus on the World War. 
The war is merely incidental or interpretive 
of the main current of influences, still flow- 
ing on. 

The economic imperialism of the last 
decade, he thinks, is quite as threatening 
as the earlier forms of the struggle for na- 
tional mastery. But we see things foggily. 
Imperialism seems to be able to call out a 
flow of humanitarian sentiment quite as 
fervid as that elicited by anti-imperialism. 
Both are hung about with glamorous mists 
hiding unpleasant facts. Mr. Moon is not 
quite clear as to the path we should follow, 
but his book is like a keen fresh wind blow- 
ing through the mists and showing us at 
least where we now stand. 

A clearing up of the present ought to 
enable both the extreme patriot and the 
extreme "pacifist" to see each other more 
distinctly. It ought to help them find their 
mutual path, with further patient study. 

France and America. By Andre Tardieu. 
Pp. 311. Houghton Mifflin & Co., Boston, 
1927. Price, $3.00. 

America Comes of Age. By Andre Siegfried. 
Tr. by H. H. Hemming and Doris Hem- 
ming. Pp. 353 and index. Harcourt, Brace 
& Co,, New York, 1927. Price, $3,00. 

We are prone to take ourselves for granted 
and forget that facts basic to ourselves may 
need to be explained to some one else. There- 
fore the two books above are particularly 
salutary. They are written by Frenchmen, 
and France differs from America even more 
than does Great Britain, Moreover, they are 
written by Frenchmen who know their 
America through residence and intimate, 
thoughtful study. Besides all this, they are 
written for a French public, only secondarily 
for American readers. 

M, Tardieu takes for a subtitle "Some ex- 
periences in co-operation," He begins by 
demonstrating that it is an erroneous though 
common assumption that Franco-American 
friendship Is a natural and sentimental af- 
finity. On the contrary, he says all the past 
has made the two nations opposite in their 
manner of thinking. Twenty centuries of de- 
fense of frontiers and wresting liberty from 
tyrants has made France primarily national- 
istic. Her activities are political in their 
nature, but she takes nationalism and national 
defense for granted. Her people are a unit 
here, however they may differ on economic 
or political policies. 

In America, on the other hand, he finds the 
spring of action to be economic. Personal 
equality before the law is the thing here taken 
for granted. Nationalism may be a subject 
of discussion, as it could not be in France. 

The contrasts which he finds are interesting, 
but as he goes on one sees that in his at- 
tempts to explain America M, Tardieu does 
not take sufficient cognizance of the fact that 
we are really, here, a federation of separate 
States, while France is a single untiy. It 
explains many things. 

M. Tardieu gives generous space to Ameri- 
can participation in the world war and recon- 
struction, showing how our fundamental 
differences forced a separation afterwards. 
But he shows clearly the French viewpoint, 
that since America withdrew from the peace 
treaty, she has no right to exact full payment 
from France of debts which were pledged on 
the assumption that America would stay in 
and help collect reparations. 

Far more searching is M. Siegfried's book. 
An economist himself, he perhaps under- 
stands the essence of American life more 
naturally. But he is as well, a historian of 
no mean caliber. 

A friendly book, but it is not altogether 
pleasant to read some of his analysis of us, 
unprejudiced and logical though it is. We 
wish he would not make the "Babbitt" and 
"Main Street" conception of America quite 
so general. It seems too that he lays too 
much stress on the conflict between Protes- 
tant and Catholic thought here. 

Yet, when all is said, the book is a master- 
piece, a work to ponder over, a statement to 
make us pause. Our slavery to public opin- 
ion, our elaborate machinery of propaganda, 
are at least dangerous. Our "Fordism" has 



made artisanship out of date. Creative ef- 
fort cannot survive under mass production. 

Tlie analysis of prohibition is astonishiingly 
unbiassed. Tlie outline of political parties 
is clear and quite different from one that 
might be done by an Anglo-Saxon. 

The book is decidedly one to be read and 
with alertness. Furthermore, the transla- 
tion is in itself an achievement in distin- 
guished, lucid English. 

Jefferson and the Embargo. By Louis Mar- 
tin Sears. Pp. 320, bibliography, and in- 
dex. Duke University Press, 1927. Price, 

When the philosopher becomes an ad- 
ministrator his ideas receive the acid test. 
Dr. Sears, who had made a previous study of 
Jefferson's pacificism, was led to pursue a 
larger study involving Jefferson's whole phi- 
losphy, and the application he made of it as 
an executive. He finds that the second Presi- 
dent's practical ability has been generally 

As proof of the essential sanity and logic 
of this great soul, he takes the embargo ap- 
proved by Jefferson in December, 1807, and 
shows how it was the most perfect substi- 
tute for war up to that time devised. It was, 
too, a direct outcome of Jefferson's idea of 
combating war with the instruments of peace. 

The book shows, through quotation, refer- 
ence, and summary, a harassed Jefferson, ap- 
pearing "at his unhappiest, yet at his best." 
The book has two outstanding excellencies. 
It is an undoubted contribution to the his- 
tory of our foreign policy ; it is a fresh help 
to the study of the man, Jefferson. It shows 
him larger than the opportunist, a man "pos- 
sessed of a philosophical consciousness of 
his own purposes." If not the greatest of 
world heroes, "he should," says Dr. Sears, 
"rank high as a friend of man." 

The Spibit of '76. By Carl Becker, J. M. 
Clark, and WilUam E. Dodd. Pp. 135. 
Robert Brookings Graduate School of Eco- 
nomics and Government, Washington, 1927, 

The three lectures here bound together 
were delivered at the Robert Brookings 
Graduate School in November, 1926. The 
subjects were chosen because of the 150th 
anniversary of the Declaration of Independ- 
ence and of the publication of Adam Smith's 
"Wealth of Nations." The authors have each 
covered a particular field and have viewed 
past events in relation to the present. 

Mr. Becker chose the narrative method. 
He gives a fragmentary manuscript which he 
professes to have found, which expounds the 
developing Federalist principles of one Jere- 
miah Wynkoop, a merchant in New York City 
just preceding the Revolution. So realistic 
is the paper that one has to look up the list 
of members of the Continental Congress to 
convince oneself that no Wynkoop was among 
them. It is an interesting study of the 
thought of '76 and quite in harmony with 
the trend of contemporary letters. 

The second lecture, by Professor Clark of 
Columbia, takes up Adam Smith and his 
exposition of the case for individualism. The 
subject is considered chiefly in its economic 
setting, though political implications are not 
neglected. The author attempts, too, the in- 
teresting task of guessing how Adam Smith 
would write today. 

The last lecture, "Virginia takes the road 
to revolution," is centered upon the per- 
sonality of Patrick Henry. It shows how 
inevitably one event after another committed 
Virginia to the Revolution before the signing 
of the Declaration. 

The little volume throws us back in spirit 
to the beginnings of our nation. 

Hispanic-Amebican History ; a Syixabus. 
By WilUam Whatley Pierson, Jr. Pp. 169. 
University of North Carolina Press, Chapel 
Hill, 1926. Price, $1.50. 

Schools and colleges today are giving much 
more of Latin American history than ever 
before. The two continents of the hemisphere 
are rapidly discovering their innate relation- 
ship. The syllabus here given by Professor 
Pierson is quite as useful for the student who 
is studying alone as for the class. 

In the introduction a reading list is given 
which has two rather unusual qualities ; it is 
full, but not so voluminous as to be discourag- 
ing, and all the books are to be had in the 
English language. The ten chapters of the 
syllabus, arranged by historic periods, are, 
even without the reading references, an inter- 
esting and logically conceived outline of His- 
panic-American history. 

The author, with the modern outlook, em- 
phasizes the institutional, social, and eco- 
nomic aspects of his subject. As it stands, it 
is a book to invite study, and its topics are 
suggestive of many new approaches to inter- 
national understanding. 







[%M . 

■T • % 




The Latchstring Is Out 

February, 1928 

American Peace Society 

Its Beginnings 

At a meeting of the Maine Peace Society at Minot, Febru- 
ary 10, 1826, a motion was carried to form a national peace 
society. Minot was the home of William Ladd. The first 
constitution for a national peace society was drawn by this 
illustrious man, at the time corresponding secretary of the 
Massachusetts Peace Society. The constitution was pro- 
visionally adopted, with alterations, February 18, 1828; but 
the society was finally and officially organized, through the 
influence of Mr. Ladd and with the aid of David Low Dodge, 
in New York City, May 8, 1828. Mr. Dodge wrote, in the 
minutes of the New York Peace Society: "The New York 
Peace Society resolved to be merged in the American Peace 
Society . . . which, in fact, was a dissolution of the old 
New York Peace Society, formed 16 August, 1815, and the 
American, May, 1828, was substituted in its place." 

Its Purpose 

The purpose of the American Peace Society shall be to 
promote permanent international peace through justice; and 
to advance in every proper way the general use of concilia- 
tion, arbitration, judicial methods, and other peaceful means 
of avoiding and adjusting differences among nations, to the 
end that right shall rule might in a law-governed world. 

— Constitution of the 
Amtrican Peace Society 
Article II. 


Aethuh Dbhein Call, Editor 

Lho Pasvolsky, Associate Editor 

Published since 1834 by 


Founded 1828 from Societies some of which began In 1815. 

Suite 612-614 Colorado Building, Washington, D. C. 

(Cable address, "Ampax, Washington.") 


Sent free to all members of the American Peace Society. Separate subscription 
price, f3.00 a year. Single copies, 30 cents each. 

Entered as second-class matter, June 1, 1911, at the Post-Office at Washington, 
D. C, under the Act of July 16, 1894. Acceptance for mailing at special rate of postage 
provided for in Section 1103, Act of October 3, 1917 ; authorized August 10, 1918. 

It being impracticuhle to express in these columns the divergent views of 
the thousands of members of the American Peace Society, full responsibility 
for the utterances of this magazine is assum-ed by the Editor. 


The American Peace Society, Some Facts 67 

The Foundations of Pe:a.ce Between Nations 68 


New Encouragement for the Cleveland Celebration — The Kellogg 
Reply — Rescinding Our Calendar — Interparliamentary Union 
Studies Migration — ^The International Whale — Pan American Ad- 
vances — Our Country's Greatest Peace Society — Editorial Notes. . 69-81 

WoBLD Problems in Review 

The Lira on the Gold Basis — French Financial Policy — Third Year of 
the Dawes Plan — Italy and Albania — The Syrian Mandate — 
Chinese Nationalist Break at Moscow — ^The Nobel Prize Winners — 
The Brookings Institution 82-^ 

General Abticles 

Thy Part (a Poem) 93 

By Charles Ramsdell Llngley 
The Way of the Law 94 

By Lyle W. Ohlander 
Practical Labors for Peace 100 

By Hon. William R. Castle 

Our Constructive Foreign Policy 103 

By Hon. Walter Scott Penfleld 

Outplaced Children in the Near East Relief 107 

By Mabell S. C. Smith 

National Defense in Peace 109 

By Dr. Harry Vanderbilt Wurdemann 
International Documents 

Efforts to Renounce War 

The United States Note of December 28, 1927 112 

The French Note of January 5, 1928 113 

The United States Note of January 11, 1928 113 

The French Note of January 22, 1928 115 

President Coolidge's Havana Address 116 

President Machada's Havana Address 121 

News in Brief 123 

Book Reviews 125 

Vol. 90 February, 1928 No. 2 




Theodobe E. Burton 


David Jatnb Hux 

Abthub Deebin Caix 

Jackson H. Ralston 

George W. White 

Business Manager 

Lacet C. Zapf 


Assistant Director, Bureau of Research, Chamber of Commerce of the United States 

Secretary, American Section, International Chamber of Commerce 


(Asterisk indicates member of Executive Committee) 

•Theodore E. Burton, President. Congressman 
from Ohio. President, American Group, Interparlia- 
mentary Union. Member House Committee on Foreign 
Affairs. Member United States Debt Funding Com- 

Philip Marshall Brown, Professor of Interna- 
tional Law, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jer- 

♦Arthur Deerin Call, Secretary, and Editor of 
the Advocate of Peace. Executive Secretary, Amer- 
ican Group, Interparliamentary Union. 

P. P. Claxton, Superintendent of Schools, Tulsa, 
Oklahoma. Formerly United States Commissioner of 

John M. Crawford, President, Parkersburg Rig & 
Reel Company, Parkersburg, West Virginia. For 
many years a Director of the Chamber of Commerce 
of the United States. 

Tyson S. Dines, Attorney of Denver, Colorado. 

John J. Esch, Chairman, Interstate Commerce 
Commission. Formerly Memlier of Congress from 

Harry A. Garfield, President, Williams College, 
Williamstown, Mass. United States Fuel Adminis- 
trator during World War. 

♦Thomas B. Green, Director, National Speakers' 
Bureau, American Red Cross. 

Dwight B. Heard, President, Dwight B. Heard 
Investment Company, Phoenix, Arizona. Director, 
Chamber of Commerce of the United States. 

♦David Jayne Hill, Washington, D. C. Formerly 
Assistant Secretary of State and Ambassador to 

Clarence H. Howard, President, Commonwealth 
Steel Company, St. Louis, Missouri. For many years 
a Director, Chamber of Commerce of the United States, 
and member of American Committee, International 
Chamber of Commerce. 

Charles L. Hyde, President, American Exchange 
Bank, Pierre, South Dakota. 

William Mather Lewis, President, Lafayette Col- 
lege, Easton, Pa. 

Felix M. McWhirter, President, Peoples State 
Bank, Indianapolis, Indiana. Director, Chamber of 
Commerce of the United States. 

E. T. Meredith, Des Moines, Iowa. Director, 
Chamber of Commerce of the United States. Member 
American Committee, International Chamber of Com- 
merce. Formerly Secretary of Agriculture. 

Frank W. Mondell, Washington, D. C. Formerly 
Congressman from Wyoming. 

♦Walter A. Morgan, D. D., Postor, New First Con- 
gregational Church, Chicago, Illinois. 

♦George M. Morris, Washington, D. C. Partner of 
the Chicago and New York law firm of Kix-MiUer & 

♦Henry C. Morris, Attorney of Chicago and Wash- 
ington, D. C. Formerly United States Consul. 

Edwin P. Morrow, Member, United States Board 
of Mediation, Washington, D. C. Formerly Governor 
of Kentucky. 

John M. Parker, formerly Governor of Louisiana, 
St. Francisville, La. 

Reginald H. Parsons, President, Parsons Invest- 
ment Company, Seattle, Washington. Member Amer- 
ican Committee, International Chamber of Commerce, 
and for many years member of the National Foreign 
Trade Council. 

Jackson H. Ralston, Attorney, Palo Alto, Califor- 

Arthur Ramsay, Southern Pines, North Carolina. 
Founder, Fairmont Seminary, Washington, D. C. 

Hiram W. Ricker, President, Poland Springs Com- 
pany, South Poland, Maine. 

♦Theodore Stanfield, Peace Advocate and Author, 
New York City. Formerly Executive Manager, Amer- 
ican Metal Company. 

♦Jay T. Stocking, D. D., Pastor, Pilgrim Congre- 
gational Church, St. Louis, Mo. 

Silas H. Strawn, Attorney of Chicago. Chairman 
of Board, Montgomery Ward Company. Director, In- 
ternational Chamber of Commerce. President, Amer- 
ican Bar Association. 

♦Henry W. Temple, Congressman from Pennsyl- 
vania. Member House Committee on Foreign Affairs. 

Robert E. Vinson, President, Western Reserve 
University, Cleveland, Ohio. 

William Way, D. D., Rector, Grace Episcopal 
Church, Charleston, South Carolina. President of the 
New England Society of Charleston. 

Oscar Wells, President, First National Bank, Bir- 
mingham, Alabama. Formerly President, American 
Bankers Association. Member American Committee, 
International Chamber of Commerce. 

Frank White, Treasurer of the United States, 
Washington, D. C. Formerly Governor of North 

♦George W. White, Treasurer. President, National 
Metropolitan Bank, Washington, D. C. Treasurer 
American Automobile Association. 

William Allen White, Proprietor and Editor, 
Emporia Daily and Weekly Gazette, Emporia, Kans. 


Elmer Ellsworth Brown, Chancellor, New York 

W. H. P. Faunce, President, Brown University. 

William P. Gest. President, Fidelity Trust Com- 
pany, Philadelphia, Pa. 

Charles Cheney Hyde, Hamilton Fish Professor 
of International Law and Diplomacy, Columbia Uni- 
versity. Formerly Solicitor for Department of State. 

George H. Judd, President, Judd & Detweller, Inc., 
Washington, D. C. 

Elihu Root, Attorney, New York City. Formerly 
Secretary of State, and for many years President of 
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 

James Brown Scott, Secretary Carnegie Endow- 
ment for International Peace, Washington, D. C. 
President, Institute of International Law. 

Charles P. Thwino, President Emeritus, Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio. 



It is a nonpartisan, nonsectarian, and 
nonprofit-making organization, free from 
motives of private gain. 

It is a corporation under the laws of 
Massachusetts, organized in 1828 by Wil- 
liam Ladd, of Maine, aided by David Low 
Dodge, of New York, 

Its century of usefulness will be fittingly 
celebrated in Cleveland, Ohio, and 
throughout the State of Maine, during 
the early days of May, 1928. The Cen- 
tury Celebration will be the background 
for an international gathering of leading 
men and women from all parts of the 

The American Peace Society is the first 
of its kind in the United States. Its pur- 
pose is to prevent the injustices of war by 
extending the methods of law and order 
among the nations, and to educate the 
peoples everywhere in what an ancient 
Roman lawgiver once called "the con- 
stant and unchanging will to give to every 
one his due."' 

It is built on justice, fair play, and law. 
It has spent its men and its resources in 
arousing tlie thoughts and the consciences 
of statesmen to the ways which are better 
than war, and of men and women every- 
where to the gifts which America can 
bring to the altar of a law-governed world. 

The first society to espouse the cause 
of international peace on the continent of 
Europe was organized at the instigation 
of this Society. 

The International Peace conferences 
originated at the headquarters of the 
American Peace Society in 1843. 

The International Law Association re- 
sulted from an extended European tour 
of Dr. James D. Miles, this Society's Sec- 
retary, in 18T3. 

Since 1829 it has worked to influence 
State legislatures and the United States 
Congress in behalf of an International 
Congress and Court of Nations. 

It has constantly worked for arbitration 
treaties and a law-governed world. 

In 1871 it organized the great peace 
jubilees throughout the country. 

The Secretary of the Society was se- 
lected by the Columbian Exposition au- 
thorities to organize the Fifth Universal 

Peace Congress, which was held in Chi- 
cago in 1893. 

This Society, through a committee, or- 
ganized the Thirteenth Universal Peace 
Congress, which was held in Boston in 

The Pan American Congress, out of 
which grew the International Bureau of 
American Republics — now the Pan Amer- 
ican Union — was authorized after nu- 
merous petitions had been presented to 
Congress by this Society. 

The Secretary of this Society has been 
chosen annually a member of the Council 
of the International Peace Bureau at 
Geneva since the second year of the Bu- 
reau's existence, 1892. 

It initiated the following American 
Peace Congresses: In New York, 1907; in 
Chicago, 1909; in Baltimore, 1911; in St. 
Louis, 1913; in San Francisco, 1915. 

It has published a magazine regularly 
since 1828. Its Advocate of Peace is 
the oldest, largest, and most widely cir- 
culated peace magazine in the world. 

It strives to work with our Government 
and to protect the principles at the basis 
of our institutions. 

In our ungoverned world of wholly in- 
dependent national units it stands for 
adequate national defense. 

It believes that the rational way to dis- 
armament is to begin by disarming poli- 

The claim of the American Peace So- 
ciety upon every loyal American citizen is 
that of an organization which has been 
one of the greatest forces for right think- 
ing in the United States for nearly a cen- 
tury ; which is today the defender of true 
American ideals and principles. 

It is supported entirely by the free and 
generous gifts, large and small, of loyal 
Americans who wish to have a part in 
this important work. 


The classes of membership and dues are : 
Annual Membership, $5 ; Sustaining Mem- 
bership, $10; Contributing Membership, 
$25; Instituuonal Membership, $25; Life 
Membership $100. 

All memberships include a full subscrip- 
tion to the monthly magazine of the So- 
ciety, the Advocate of Peace. 


Adopted by the American Peace Society, November 30, 1925 

The American Peace Society reaffirms, at 
this its uinety-seventli annual meeting, its 
abiding faith in the precepts of its illustrious 
founders. These founders, together with 
the men of later times who have shared in 
the labors of this Society, are favorably 
known because of their services to the build- 
ing and preservation of the Republic. Their 
work for iKjaee between nations must not 
be forgotten. 

I^argely because of their labors, the pur- 
poses of the American Peace Society have 
become more and more the will of the world, 
and opponents of the war system of settling 
International disputes have reason for a 
larger hope and a newer courage. 

At such a time as this, with Its rapidly de- 
veloping International achievements, it Is fit- 
ting that the American Peace Society should 
restate Its precei>ts of a century In the light 
of the ever-approaching tomorrow. 

Peace between nations, demanded by every 
legitimate Interest, can rest securely and 
permanently only on the principles of jus- 
tice as interpreted In terms of mutually ac- 
cepted international law ; but justice between 
nations and its expression in the law are pos- 
sible only as the collective intelligence and 
the common faith of peoples approve and de- 

The American Peace Society Is not unmind- 
ful of the work of the schools, of the 
churches, of the many organizations through- 
out the world aiming to advance Interest 
and wisdom in the matters of a desirable 
and attainable peace; but this desirable, at- 
tainable, and hopeful peace between nations 
must rest upon the commonly accepted 
achievements in the settlement of Interna- 
tional disputes. 

These achievements, approved in every in- 
stance by the American Peace Society, and 
in which some of its most distinguished mem- 
bers have participated, have heretofore 
been — 

By direct negotiations between free, sov- 
ereign, and Independent States, working 
through official representatives, diplomatic or 
consular agents — a work now widely ex- 
tended by the League of Nations at Geneva; 

By the good offices of one or more friendly 

nations, upon the request of the contending 
parties or of other and disinterested parties — 
a policy consistently and persistently urged 
by the United States; 

By the mediation of one or more nations 
upon their own or other initiative — likewise 
a favorite policy of the United States ; 

By commissions of inquiry, duly provided 
for by international convention and many ex- 
isting treaties, to which the Government of 
the United States Is pre-eminently a con- 
tracting party ; 

By councils of conciliation — a method of 
adjustment fortunately meeting with the ap- 
proval of leading nations, Including the 
United States; 

By friendly composition, in which nations 
in controversy accept, in lieu of their own, 
the opinion of an upright and disinterested 
third party — a method tried and not found 
wanting by the Government of the United 
States ; 

By arbitration, in which controversies are 
adjusted upon the basis of respect for law — 
a method brought into modern and general 
practice by the English-speaking peoples. 

All of these processes will be continued, 
emphasized, and improved. While justice 
and the rules of law — principles, customs, 
practices recognized as applicable to nations 
in their relations with one another — fre- 
quently apply to each of these methods just 
enumerated, there remain two outstanding, 
continuous, and pressing demands : 

(1) Recurring, preferably periodic, (!Oufer- 
ences of duly appointed delegates, acting 
under instruction, for the purpose of restat- 
ing, amending, reconciling, declaring, and 
progressively codifying those rules of interna- 
tional law shown to be necessary or useful 
to the best interests of civilized States — a 
proposal repeatedly made by enlightened 
leaders of thought in the United States. 

(2) Adherence of all States to a Perma- 
nent Court of International Justice mutually 
acceptable, sustained, and made use of for 
the determination of controversies between 
nations, involving legal rights — an institu- 
tion due to the initiative of the United States 
and based upon the experience and practice 
of the American Supreme Court. 




February, 1928 






THE celebration of the one hundredth 
anniversary of the American Peace 
Society, to be held in Cleveland, Ohio, 
May 7 to 11 next, seems to have no opposi- 
tion. Talk about it is aU one way. It is 
friendly and most encouraging, and the 
encouragements are coming in from prac- 
, tically every "school of thought." The 
church, including the Quakers, govern- 
ment officials, universities, peace organiza- 
tions of every stripe, patriotic organiza- 
tions, Daughters of the American Revo- 
lution, Kiwanis clubs, chambers of com- 
merce, are but a few of the groups kindly 
offering to help the Celebration. 

Something of the nature of this friendly 
and encouraging co-operation is set forth 
in a set of resolutions, adopted January 
14, 1928, by the National Executive Com- 
mittee of the American Legion, meeting 
at Indianapolis, Indiana. These resolu- 
tions, typical of others, will be especially 
gratifying to every member of the Ameri- 
can Peace Society. The resolutions read: 

"Whereas the American Peace Society 
is to observe in May, 1928, the one hun- 
dredth anniversary of the founding of that 
Society, by holding its convention in the 
city of Cleveland, Ohio, and by sponsoring 
in connection with that convention a 
gathering of distinguished representatives 
of the leading nations of the world at a 
so-called World Conference on Interna- 
tional Justice ; and 

"Whereas the policies of such Society 
are under the guidance of officers and di- 

rectors, most of whom are of outstanding 
and recognized experience in matters of 
national or international policy; and 

"Whereas, upon the entry of the United 
States into the World War, the officers of 
the American Peace Society supported the 
United States Government and, as evi- 
denced by the published editorials of the 
Society, loyally and repeatedly announced 
this position ; and 

"Whereas the declared purpose of the 
American Peace Society is 'to promote 
permanent international peace through 
justice; and to advance in every proper 
way the general use of conciliation, arbi- 
tration, judicial methods, and other peace- 
ful means of avoiding and adjusting dif- 
ferences among nations, to the end that 
right shall rule might in a law-governed 
world'; and 

'^^hereas, in seeking the accomplish- 
ment of such purpose, the Society is not 
unmindful of the present responsibilities 
of our government to provide for itself 
reasonable defense and has published the 
following statement of its attitude on that 
subject: 'In our migoverned world of 
wholly independent national units, it (the 
American Peace Society) stands for ade- 
quate national defense. It believes that 
the rational way to disarmament is to be- 
gin by disarming policies' ; and 

"Whereas the Society has secured the 
acceptance of many men of outstanding 
international influence and responsibility 
to address the World Conference on Inter- 
national Justice to be held next May, in- 
cluding, among many, such speakers as 
President Calvin Coolidge, Hon. Aristide 
Briand, French Minister of Foreign Af- 
fairs; Sir Austen Chamberlain, British 
Minister of Foreign Affairs ; and Dr. Gus- 
tav Stressemann, German Minister of For- 
eign Affairs; and 




'Whereas the above-quoted purposes 
and policies of the American Peace So- 
ciety are thoroughly in accordance with 
the declared principles of the American 
Legion; and 

"Whereas the American Legion owes it 
to its members and to the public to take 
a definite and constructive stand upon all 
matters of importance pertaining to the 
promotion of international peace; now, 
therefore, be it 

"Resolved, That the National Executive 
Committee of the American Legion hereby 
expresses the belief that on this basis 
the forthcoming World Conference on 
International Justice sponsored by the 
American Peace Society has great poten- 
tial promise of substantial and well- 
directed progress toward the 'promotion 
of peace and good will,* as sought in ac- 
cordance with the principles of the Amer- 
ican Legion in a sane, conservative, con- 
structive and loyal advance toward an 
honorable self-respecting international 
peace; and be it further 

"Resolved, That National Headquarters 
of the American Legion announce this 
attitude of helpful encouragement to the 
American Peace Society in the forthcom- 
ing World Conference on International 
Justice and give proper publicity to this 
action through the press and through the 
AmeHcan Legion Monthly as long as the 
American Peace Society and the other 
sponsors of the World Conference on In- 
ternational Justice continue to support the 
principles of an adequate national defense 
and as it is defined by the National De- 
fense Act, to the end that the public and 
the members of the American Legion may 
not misunderstand the significance and 
character of the proposed conference and 
the attitude of the American Legion to- 
ward peace/' 

There is reason for believing that the 
coming Cleveland Celebiation will result 
in a co-ordination of many agencies con- 
cerned to place the peace movement once 
again upon its enduring principles, a co- 
ordination perhaps unprecedented in the 
history of America. Peace and patriotic 
organizations can and ought to be shoulder 
to shoulder in this peculiarly American 
enterprise of finding substitutes for war. 


THE most astonishing proposal in the 
name of international peace, at least 
within the last decade, came from our 
Secretary of State in a note to the French 
Minister of Foreign Affairs, Aristide 
Briand, December 28, 1927, which note 
was made public January 3. The note 
proposed "an effort to obtain the adher- 
ence of all the principal powers of the 
world to a declaration renouncing war as 
an instrument of national policy." This 
means that our Department of State is 
ready to join with the other principal 
powers to renounce all war as an instru- 
ment of national policy. To one at all ac- 
quainted with the struggle of the peace 
workers during the last one hundred years 
this is an astonishing statement indeed. 

When, upon the proposal of the Polish 
delegation, the Assembly of the League of 
Nations adopted last September a decla- 
ration that all wars of aggression are, and 
shall always be, prohibited ; that every pa- 
cific means must be employed to settle dis- 
putes of every description which may 
arise between States; and that the States, 
members of the League, are under obliga- 
tion to conform to these principles, there 
was little enthusiasm among the delegates 
in the Assembly. It was generally felt, 
notwithstanding the unanimity with which 
it was passed, that the action was little 
more than an innocuous gesture. The 
declaration received little attention from 
the press. Members of the League do not 
seem to have changed their policies in any 
way because of this action. 

When M. Briand transmitted to our 
government last June his "draft of pact" 
between France and the United States, 
his proposed treaty aroused little interest 
in this country except among a few. It 
proposed that the United States and 
France should condemn resort to war and 
renounce it as an instrument of national 



policy. From the text, it is clear that 
M. Briand proposed the renunciation of 
all war as an instrument of national policy 
for France and the United States. 

While there was considerable enthusi- 
astic support by a limited number of per- 
sons in our country, the proposal was defi- 
nitely condemned by others. It was 
pointed out, for example, that the pro- 
posal, if accepted, would be in violation 
of our policy of treating all nations alike ; 
that it was more in the nature of a politi- 
cal expedient than an extension of those 
judicial processes upon which rests most 
securely the abiding processes of peace. 
It was further pointed out that the pro- 
posal could not be accepted under our 
Constitution, because under the terms of 
that instrimient Congress is specifically 
given the right to declare war. It was 
felt by some that if the plan were gen- 
erally adopted it would establish the dis- 
interestedness of the United States in 
every European conflict and make it im- 
possible for this country to extend aid to 
a deserving nation, as we chose to do in 
1917. In short, it might mean, under cer- 
tain circumstances, that the United States 
would find itself deprived of the right to 
defend the right by force. And yet our 
State Department has accepted M. Bri- 
and's original proposal with the under- 
standing that it be extended to include all 
the principal powers of the world. 

In this situation it is proper to recall 
that Judge William Jay, son of John Jay, 
and for the last ten years of his life Presi- 
dent of the American Peace Society, wrote 
in 1842 his little work, entitled "War and 
Peace,'" in which he proposed what is now 
familiarly known in international prac- 
tice as the clause compromissoire. This 
clause has been incorporated in many 
international treaties. An interesting 
aspect of Mr. Jay's proposal was that he 
suggested that it be inserted "in our next 
treaty with France." The clause in the 

form which Mr. Jay advocated it is as 
follows : 

"It is agreed between the contracting 
parties that if, unhappily, any controversy 
shaU hereafter arise between them in re- 
spect to the true meaning and intention of 
any stipulation in this present treaty, or 
in respect to any other subject, which con- 
troversy cannot be satisfactorily adjusted 
by negotiation, neither party shall resort 
to hostilities against the other; but the 
matter in dispute shall, by a special con- 
vention, be submitted to the arbitrament 
of one or more friendly powers; and the 
parties hereby agree to abide by the award 
which may be given in pursuance of such 

While there were certain forms of the 
clause in earlier treaties, for example, our 
treaty with Tripoli in 1796, Mr. Jay's idea 
was incorporated in Article XXI of the 
Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, between the 
United States and Mexico, signed Feb- 
ruary 2, 1848. This article of the treaty 
makes use of many of the exact phrases of 
Mr. Jay's proposal. Out of such back- 
ground sprang the Eoot treaties, the Bryan 
treaties, and the various arbitrations of 
actual disputes between nations. In a real 
sense the suggestion of William Jay has 
served to outlaw war. It was what is now 
the original Briand proposal; and, if ex- 
tended to "all the principal powers of the 
world," it would represent with no little 
exactness the position now taken by Mr. 

Nevertheless, Mr. Kellogg's proposal 
has aroused astonishment, especially in 
Europe. One reason for this astonish- 
ment, of peculiar interest to the United 
States, is the unanimity with which the 
European press points out that the pro- 
posal runs counter to certain articles of 
the Covenant of the League of Nations — 
indeed, of the Locarno Treaties — which 
articles provide under certain circum- 
stances for the waging of war by the 
League or by allies. Mr. Kellogg's pro- 
posal, if adopted, would do away with the 




machinery of sanctions contemplated by 
the Covenant and with the guarantees in 
the treaties of Locarno. This is found, 
particularly in France, to constitute an 
insuperable objection. Then, too, the Eng- 
lish press finds it difficult to square Mr. 
Kellogg's principle with our government's 
enlarged naval program. Furthermore, 
there is the United States Senate. How 
it will treat the proposal, once it appears 
before that body, in the light of that sec- 
tion of our Constitution which grants to 
Congress the right to declare war, remains 
to be seen. Some are led to ask if the 
United States is proposing to renounce its 
right to uphold the Monroe Doctrine by 
force, if necessary. Others wonder what is 
meant by the phrase first used by M. Bri- 
and, "an instrument of national policy." 
The fact is that Mr. Kellogg's proposal is 

In it, however, there is one patent mean- 
ing. It is a recognition of the demand 
by peoples everywhere that some way 
shall be found for the maintenance of a 
general international peace. There is a 
solidarity uniting the community of na- 
tions. War as a means of settling inter- 
national disputes is viewed at last with a 
general disfavor. Men and women re- 
sponsible for the work of the world are ex- 
pecting their statesmen to find better and 
saner ways for adjusting differences be- 
tween nations. This is the patent mean- 
ing in the astonishing correspondence be- 
tween France and the United States. 


THE difficulties facing the effort to 
achieve something definite in behalf 
of international peace appear when con- 
fronted with a specific proposal. This is 
true of the definite need for the abolition 
of our present calendar and for the adop- 
tion in its place of a new and more sensi- 
ble substitute. 

There is nothing sacrosanct about our 
calendar. It is a sort of illegitimate child 
of foolishness and egotism. In a vain- 
glorious attempt to improve upon the 
Egyptian set of months, Julius Cassar 
grabbed a day from February and made 
and named one of the longer months July, 
after himself. Later, Augustus Caesar, 
sensitive to have a month quite as big as 
Julius', took the next month, added to it 
another day, which he also took from Feb- 
ruary, and had it named August, after 
himself. He then proceeded to jumble 
some other days and to give us the hodge- 
podge known as our modern calendar. 

The word month is quite meaningless. 
It may mean twenty-eight, twenty-nine, 
thirty, or thirty-one days. It may mean 
a calendar month or a lunar month. And 
there are different kinds of lunar months. 
Our poor calendar, as a measure of time, 
is both inaccurate and varying. It is im- 
possible for business men to compare their 
business results by months. It is impos- 
sible to compare one month with the next, 
or a month with the same month in an- 
other year, for each year every month is 
different from the same month in the 
year before and the year after. The silly 
calendar gives the workmen a maze of 
pay-days. As a result of it, days have a 
different economic value. The date for 
Easter jumps around through March and 
April over a bewildering gamut of thirty- 
five days. It has been ascertained that a 
weekly periodical gets a larger daily av- 
erage of receipts on Monday than on any 
other day of the week. It charges its 
salaries and wages to Saturday and its 
other expenditt^res to Wednesday, In, 
1922, for example, there were four months 
in which there were five Saturdays, four 
months in which there were five Mondays, 
and four months in which there were five 
Wednesdays. But those months did not 
coincide. In January there was an extra 
Monday; so the periodical's income that 

19 £8 



month was, disproportionately large. In 
March there was an extra bill-paying day. 
In April there was an extra salary day. 
In May there was an extra income day 
and an extra bill-paying day. In July 
there was an extra salary day and an extra 
income day. In August there was an 
extra bill-paying day. In September there 
was an extra salary day. In October 
there was an extra income day and an 
extra bill-paying day. And in December 
there was an extra salary day. This ir- 
regularity not only makes it impossible to 
compare one month with the next, but it 
also makes it impossible to compare the 
month with the same month in another 
year, for, as has been said, each year every 
month is different from the same month 
in the year before and the year after. 
Under these conditions, what do monthly 
comparisons mean? Nothing. In some 
cases it means worse than nothing, for it 
misleads directors and confuses executive 

As a piece of business machinery, it 
must be confessed, the month is a joke. 

In the presence of such a situation it 
is reasonable to hope for, at least to desire, 
an international fixed calendar. 

Such a calendar is possible. The year 
can be divided into thirteen months of 
twenty-eight days, each comprising four 
complete weeks, beginning on Sunday and 
ending on Saturday. This would necessi- 
tate provision for an extra month in the 
calendar. This month could be inserted 
between June and July by combining the 
last thirteen days of June and the first 
fifteen days of July. In this way the 
twenty-ninth, thirtieth, and thirty-first 
days from the present months would dis- 
appear and we would have thirteen 
months of four weeks each, with every 
month in every year exactly alike as to 
dates and as to names of the days of 
the week. The last day in every year 
would be dated December 29 as an extra 

Sabbath ending the last week. In leap 
years the difficulty of an additional day 
might be met by inserting another extra 
Sabbath, to be known as June 29. Indeed, 
this rearrangement of the calendar is pro- 
vided for in substantially these ways by 
what is known as the Cotsworth Plan. 

The advantages of this plan, if adopted, 
would be many. All months being equal, 
the day of the week would always indicate 
the monthly date, and the monthly date 
would indicate the week-day name. Both 
day and date could then be simply re- 
corded on the dials of all clocks and 
watches. Weekly wages could be harmo- 
nized with monthly rents and other ac- 
counts. Pay-days would come around on 
the same date each month. Fractions of 
weeks at month-ends would cease. The 
new calendar would simplify accounting 
and statistical reports, not to mention in- 
terest amounts. It would simplify one's 
plans for Easter. It would save money 
in printing and circulating calendars. It 
would save time in referring to calendars. 
It would do away with holidays in the 
middle of the week and assure workers of 
two or three days when holidays occur. 

There is no argument against changing 
the calendar except inertia. Since the 
calendar has been changed from time to 
time; since, indeed, nations with a popu- 
lation of more than three hundred mil- 
lion inhabitants have changed their cal- 
endars since the late war, the Turkish 
Government changing the Mohammedan 
Sabbath from Friday to Sunday, this ar- 
gument is not impressive. 

Under date of October 7, the Secretary 
to the League of Nations Committee hav- 
ing to do vnth the reform of the calen- 
dar wrote to Mr. M. B. Cotsworth, of the 
Fixed Calendar League, Rochester, New 
York, as follows: 

"The folloveing letter was sent to the 
United States and other governments on 
September 30th: 




The Secretary General of the League of 
Nations has the honor to communicate to 
the United States Government the following 
resolution which was adopted by the Ad- 
visory and Technical (Committee for Com- 
munications and Transit during its eleventh 
session, held at Geneva from August 19th 
to 22nd, 1927: 

"The Advisory and Technical Committee 
for Communications and Transit decides to 
request the Secretary General of the League 
of Nations to invite all the administrations 
and organizations concerned to give the com- 
mittee all information of value to it on any 
action taken on the suggestions contained in 
the report of the Committee of Enquiry into 
the Reform of the Calendar, and more par- 
ticularly on the national proposal for the 
establishment of committees of enquiry to 
study this reform." 

"In accordance with this resolution, the 
Secretary General has the honor to re- 
quest the United States Government to 
forward to him any useful information 
on this subject which it may possess." 

Simplification of the calendar is a ques- 
tion of immediate and international im- 

Calendar simplification will be of the 
greatest value to all classes and all pro- 
fessions. It involves no controversies of 
any kind. It is a scientific proposition 
backed by leaders in all walks of life. 
Mr. George Eastman, of Kodak fame, and 
many other leading men of affairs are 
especially interested. 

The International Chamber of Com- 
merce and the League of Nations have 
both investigated and acted favorably on 
it. The Chamber of Commerce of the 
United States, on the recommendations 
of its board of directors and national 
counselors, has just formed a special com- 
mittee of eleven men to investigate the 
subject and report. The Department of 
State has just canvassed all government 
departments on the question, with the 
result that all are favorable. 

An international conference, similar to 
the one held in this country which estab- 

lished standard time, will eventually be 
called by international agreement to con- 
sider the equalization of the months for 
universal adoption. 




THE Interparliamentary Union hopes 
to discuss at its Twenty-fifth Confer- 
ence, to be held in the City of Berlin, prob- 
ably in July next, certain aspects of mi- 
grations. At the Twenty-second Confer- 
ence, meeting in 1924, at Berne and Ge- 
neva, the Union established a Permanent 
Committee on Social Questions and in- 
structed it to study the problems of emi- 
gration and immigration. The committee 
is devoting itself especially to certain 
political features of the problem. Since 
the members have been kind enough to ad- 
dress specific inquiries to us, we believe 
our foreign friends will be interested in 
the following attitudes of our country to- 
ward given phases of the matter. 

Briefly, public opinion in the United 
States may be said to favor our immigra- 
tion laws as they exist. Some there are 
who would like to see the act somewhat 
liberalized; others who would do away 
with all immigration to the United States. 
In the main, however, our people seem to 
favor our present selective immigration 
law, which lets into the country only the 
better class of immigrants, irrespective of 
the country of embarkation. 

Our government does not interest itself 
in emigration from the United States, for 
the reason that few Americans emigrate 
to other countries, these consisting of a 
comparatively few immigrants and their 
children born here. 

Our government welcomes immigrants 
from the learned professions, visitors, 
tourists, transients, and students, no mat- 
ter from what country they come. Immi- 
gration from Asia is practically forbidden, 




due, it would seem, to certain incompati- 
bilities between Oriental and American 
tastes. Immigration from the south of 
Europe is restricted because of the feeling 
that the better class of persons from that 
section of Europe do not come for the pur- 
pose of settling in America. Immigration 
from the north of Europe is favored be- 
cause immigrants from that part of the 
world belong to stocks similar to our 
own and assimilate more readily with our 

The authorities of our country do not 
seek to maintain ties of a political, social, 
or other nature between immigrants to our 
shores and their mother countries. Emi- 
g^rant Americans remain Americans until 
they expatriate themselves. The govern- 
ment neither encourages nor discourages 
such emigrant Americans. It pursues the 
same policy in all countries to which our 
nationals may go. 

Our government makes no attempt to 
assimilate the Orientals, expecting that 
such persons will soon return to their own 
homes. This is true also of many who 
come from the south of Europe. Those 
who come here with the intention of re- 
maining, however, are helped to become 
assimilated. Assimilation schools exist to 
teach immigrants American ideas. These 
schools are usually of a local nature and 
often supported by private enterprises. 
They exist for the benefit of the more 
ignorant and less favored classes, wholly 
independent of the country of origin. 

The people of this country would prob- 
ably not be interested in any general 
treaty concerning immigration or emigra- 
tion affecting the United States. There 
would be no opposition, of course, to other 
countries adopting general treaties of such 
a character. 

These remarks, offered in reply to the 
questions submitted from the committee, 
should include the assurance to our friends 
abroad that all thoughtful persons in 
America will be glad to know that the 

Interparliamentary Union is studying the 
problem, and they will await with interest 
the results of its investigations. 


THE conservation of the whale, in the 
view of our government, is entitled to 
an international conference. The in- 
formation has cropped out in corre- 
spondence between Washington and the 
League of Nations. Our Department of 
State, according to this correspondence, 
is not favorable to' the suggestion that we 
permit testimony relating to criminal 
cases in foreign countries to be carried on 
by the use of letters rogatory on the 
ground that there is no provision for such 
a procedure in the laws of our Federal 
Government. Since such proceedings 
CQuld be carried on only pursuant to the 
laws of the several States, our Depart- 
ment of State does not deem it advisable 
to make commitments by international 
conventions to change the existing prac- 
tice. Moreover, evidence obtained in for- 
eign countries through letters rogatory 
could not be used in criminal cases in the 
United States, since under the Constitu- 
tion the accused must be confronted by 
the witnesses against him. The Govern- 
ment of the United States is not prepared 
to serve summonses emanating from for- 
eign courts on witnesses or experts resi- 
dent in the United States or to surrender 
persons in custody except through the 
process of extradition. 

Our authorities have recently held that 
conventions on the subject of judicial co- 
operation will doubtless serve useful pur- 
poses among countries of close geographic 
proximity; but that it is not apparent 
that uniform applications of such agree- 
ments is necessary. It appears that we 
would not look with favor upon any gen- 
eral international convention regarding 
the legal positions and functions of consuls. 




It is the view of the Government of 
the United States that international ar- 
rangements on the general subject of (1) 
nationality, (2) territorial waters, (3) 
diplomatic privileges and immunities, and 
(4) responsibility of States in respect of 
injury caused in their territory to the per- 
son or property of foreigners would serve 
a useful purpose and would, therefore, be 
desirable; and that there should be no in- 
superable obstacles to the concluding of 
agreements on these general subjects. It 
is in relation to the exploitation of the 
products of the sea that the Government of 
the United States has turned to the matter 
of whales. It has expressed the opinion 
that information as to the status of fisher- 
ies for most of the true fishes is not suf- 
ficiently completed to admit of adequate 
regulations at the present time; that in 
most cases fisheries may best be regulated 
by treaties between the nations most di- 
rectly concerned; that investigations to 
determine the best interests of various 
fisheries should be encouraged, and that 
an international conference is desirable to 
consider the problem of conserving the 


THE Sixth International Conference 
of American States convened in the 
city of Havana, January 16, is a major 
international fact. It is devoting itself 
to an examination of the Pan American 
Union as an organization, to matters of 
justice in the Western Hemisphere, to 
problems of communications, to intellec- 
tual co-operation, to economic and social 
problems, to reports on treaties, conven- 
tions, and resolutions, and to the possi- 
bilities of future conferences. 

These conferences, the first one of 
which met in Washington in the winter 
1889-90, the second in Mexico City in 
1901, the third in Rio de Janeiro, 1906, 

the fourth in Buenos Aires in 1910, the 
fifih in Santiago, Chile, in 1923, have all 
contributed to the upbuilding of Paji 
Americanism. Indeed Pan Americanism 
may be said to date from 1826, when, 
upon the initiative of Simon Bolivar, it 
was attempted to organize at Panama a 
conference of envoys from republics of 
the Western World "to deliberate upon 
objects of peculiar concernment in this 
hemisphere." This early will to co-opera- 
tion in our Western World found vibrant 
expression in Henry Clay, "the most de- 
termined champion in the United States 
of the Latin American nations"; in the 
work of John Quincy Adams, and, much 
later, in the energetic initiative of James 
G. Blaine, who, as Secretary of State in 
the Cabinet of President Benjamin Harri- 
son, planned in 1889 the conference "to 
consider and discuss methods of prevent- 
ing war between the nations of America," 
which conference began the series of which 
this is the sixth. 

The fact that President Coolidge saw 
fit not only to appoint a commission of 
most distinguished jurists to represent us 
at the Conference in Havana, but himself 
to go to the conference and to deliver at 
the opening session a carefully prepared 
address, is evidence of the importance at- 
tached to the event. This address, appear- 
ing elsewhere in these columns as an in- 
ternational document, was an address in 
the interest of peace. It pointed out that 
one of our strongest characteristics in 
this Western Hemisphere is "a determina- 
tion to adjust differences among ourselves, 
not by resort to force, but by the applica- 
tion of the principles of justice and 
equity." Mr. Coolidge clearly showed his 
faith in the sovereignty of small nations. 
Not for a long time has the position of 
the American Peace Society been so ade- 
quately stated by one in official position 
as by President Coolidge when in his 
address he said : 



"It is a high example that we have set 
for the world in resolving international 
differences without resort to force. If 
these conferences mean anything, they 
mean the bringing of all our people more 
definitely and more completely under the 
reign of law. After all, it is in that di- 
rection that we must look with the great- 
est assurance for human progress. 

"We can make no advance in the realm 
of economics, we can do nothing for edu- 
cation, we can accomplish but little even 
in the sphere of religion, imtil human 
affairs are brought within the orderly rule 
of law. The surest refuge of the weak 
and the oppressed is in the law. It is 
pre-eminently the shield of small nations. 
This is necessarily a long, laborious proc- 
ess, which must broaden out from prece- 
dent to precedent, from the general ac- 
ceptance of principle to principle. 

"New activities require new laws. The 
rules for the governing of aviation are 
only beginning to be considered. We shall 
make more progress in the end if we pro- 
ceed with deUberation. No doubt you will 
find in your discussions many principles 
that you are ready to announce as sound 
and settled rules of action." 

Persons acquainted with the facts can- 
not accuse the United States of imperi- 
alistic designs in Latin America. This 
country contemplates the acquisition of 
no territory anywhere south of the Rio 
Grande. On the contrary, it is our con- 
cern that freedom and self-government 
shall become increasingly the pride and 
strength of our sister American republics. 
When President Machado of Cuba, speak- 
ing at the opening sessions of the con- 
ference, referred to the people of this 
country as "the great people whom Cuba 
had the honor of seeing at her side in 
her bloody struggle for independence, 
which she enjoys without limitation," he 
said not only a true and gracious thing, 
he aroused the justifiable pride of us all. 

There is no dobut that the Sixth Inter- 
national Conference of American States 

will register an advance in what Presi- 
dent Machado called "the welfare and 
glory of this hemisphere, root of a new 
humanity and crucible of a new civiliza- 

It is the view of many that there is a 
wide difference of opinion between the 
Latin Pan- Americans and the North Pan- 
Americans; that, indeed, these divergent 
views represent two dangerous opposing 
forces. It appears that Latin Pan-Ameri- 
cans crave a fuller share in the decisions 
affecting inter-American affairs. We are 
told that Latin America's chief grievance 
against the United States is that we are 
altogether too willing to dominate the 
Western Hemisphere. There may be some 
ground for this view. The Conference in 
Havana will lessen these frictions. 

One acquainted with the history of 
these American conferences, with the rec- 
ord of the men serving as delegates in 
Havana, cannot "view with alarm" any of 
these differences. The Monroe Doctrine 
is a common possession of our twenty- 
one republics. It will remain such for 
a long time. Objections to it are of no 
appreciable importance. Every delegate 
at Havana representing the United States 
is known to recognize the equality of 
American republics under the law of na- 
tions. We may believe that our own dele- 
gates stand for the territorial integrity 
of all the Latin American nations, and 
that they are opposed to all acts of ag- 
gression between any of these States. 
When Charles Evans Hughes, head of the 
United States delegation at Havana, pre- 
sented as Secretary of State, on March 
2, 1925, the thirty projects prepared by 
the American Institute of International 
Law to the Governing Board of the Pan 
American Union, he knew that Project 
No. 7 was a declaration of the rights and 
duties of nations. In presenting these 




projects, including this declaration of the 
rights and duties of nations, he referred 
to them as marking "a definite step in 
the progress of civilization and the pro- 
motion of peace." It should be added 
that the man who drafted this declara- 
tion of the rights and duties of nations, 
James Brown Scott, is also one of our 
delegates at Havana. There is no reason 
for doubting that the conference in Ha- 
vana will recognize that every State has 
duties as well as rights, and that these 
correlative rights and duties relate to the 
existence, equality, protection, and happi- 
ness of all the States. 

It is fair to presume that the confer- 
ence in Havana will facilitate the peaceful 
settlement of international disputes on 
this hemisphere. Judging from a recent 
address by President Coolidge, nothing 
will be done at Havana to imperil the 
Panama Canal or to belittle the fact that 
disturbances in the Cai;ibbean are almost 
always of special concern to us. Our 
Latin American friends, as a result of 
the conference, will see more clearly than 
seems to have been possible of late that 
this country seeks no additional territory, 
and that the chief aim of the United 
States is to advance the processes of 
friendly co-operation, upon which depend 
the common interests of all the peoples. 

Latin American States will learn again, 
what in their innermost consciousness they 
have always known, that the United States 
has no designs upon the independence of 
any of them. They will realize afresh, 
as pointed out by Mr. Hughes in his able 
speech of January 21, that the primary 
motives of this country are to advance sta- 
bility, mutual good-will, and co-operation 
throughout this Hemisphere. These are 
not merely pious wishes with us of the 
northern regions of our western world. 
They represent a desire to play our part 
actively, constructively, and worthily in 
the business. 


IT WOULD contribute to sanity if the 
various peace societies of our country 
would recall from time to time that, im- 
portant as is their work, there is a peace 
society greater than the greatest of them, 
namely, our Department of State. This, 
our greatest peace society, is financially 
supported by the membership of over one 
hundred eighteen million of us. It is 
working through ambassadors and minis- 
ters in fifty-five different countries. These 
ministers and ambassadors are aided in 
their work by approximately six hundred 
persons. This peace society is working 
also in over four hundred cities, scattered 
through fifty-seven countries, with a per- 
sonnel of nearly three thousand others. 
No other peace society in America — in- 
deed, not all of the other peace societies 
put together — can compare, even in per- 
sonnel, with such an organization. 

The head office of this, our greatest, 
peace society, located in Washington, 
D. C, is itself an impressive organization. 
Acting under the President of the United 
States, the chief officer of this Society is 
known as the Secretary of State, ranking 
member of the President's Cabinet. 
There is an Undersecretary of State and 
four Assistant Secretaries of State. 
There is a legal department in this society 
headed by an official known as the Solici- 
tor of the Department of State. There is 
a chief clerk, with an administrative 
assistant. There is a Division of Far 
Eastern Affairs, another of Latin Ameri- 
can Affairs, another of Mexican Affairs, 
another of Near Eastern Affairs, another 
of Eastern European Affairs, and another 
of Western European Affairs. There is 
an economic adviser. There are divisions 
having to do with publications, with the 
control of passports, with current infor- 
mation, and with our foreign service ad- 




ministration. There is a Bureau of Ac- 
counts and another of Indexes and Ar- 
chives. There are other divisions. Over 
six hundred persons carry on the im- 
mediate labors of the main office of this 
functioning society of peace. 

An interesting thing about this peace 
society is that it does not devote its entire 
time to discussing theoretical questions 
and controversial problems of moral as- 
piration. It deals directly, continually, 
and almost always effectively with definite 
international situations. 

Some of the work of this peace society 
has to do with our foreign trade. This 
trade is not a negligible matter. In 1927 
our country's exports amounted to $4,968,- 
318,000, representing an increase of 41/^ 
per cent over the export values of 1926. 
The merchandise purchased by the United 
States from foreign countries in 1927 was 
$4,252,024,000. Thus during 1927 our 
foreign trade amounted to $9,220,342,000. 
This business affects all of our consular 
officers in foreign fields and often our 
diplomatic representatives. There are the 
customs invoices, the issuing of bills of 
health, shipping, seamen's rights, landing 
certificates, trade disputes, customs rul- 
ings, and countless other duties, some of 
them affecting war and peace. 

The statistics of the activities of the 
consular officers give a clear picture of 
some of the effects of our foreign trade 
upon the activities of the Department of 
State during the fiscal year 1927. During 
that year the consuls certified 964,566 
invoices of merchandise shipped to the 
United States; they rendered 172,912 
notarial services; they cleared 19,349 
American vessels; they shipped and dis- 
charged 40,467 seamen; they issued 45,- 
263 bills of health; they made more than 
100,000 reports on trade conditions for 
the information of American business 
men and the Department of Commerce; 
their correspondence reached the total of 

2,918,157 pieces; the total number of the 
services rendered by them was 1,949,516, 
and the total amount of fees collected was 
$7,116,495.92, which was $267,183.48 
more than the amount collected in 1926, 
and far more than enough to pay the 
entire cost of the consular branch of the 
foreign service. Mr. Wilbur J. Carr, 
Assistant Secretary of State, speaking 
before the subcommittee of the House 
Committee on Appropriations last No- 
vember, gave the following interesting in- 
formation relative to the simple matter 
of passport fees. He said : 

"It follows, as matter of course, that 
the more our interests in foreign countries 
multiply and our trade increases, the 
greater is the number of Americans who 
go abroad. This increase in travel is 
shown by the number of passports issued 
by the Department of State. The number 
issued in 1927 was 189,762, an increase 
of 3.7 per cent over the number issued in 
1926 and 53 per cent over the number 
issued in 1923. The fees received there- 
from amounted to $1,587,409, enough to 
pay the entire cost of operating the De- 
partment of State in Washington, with 
$181,204 to spare." 

Thus we have here a peace society rep- 
resenting us all and dealing with sizable 
business. Take the matter of our private 
investments abroad. According to our 
Department of Commerce, these invest- 
ments, increasing from 1923 to 1926 by 
38.3 per cent, reached at the end of 1926 
the grand total of $11,215,000,000. 
Nearly one-half of these investments are 
in Latin America. One of the most im- 
portant functions of this our common 
peace society is to protect and further the 
interests of American citizens in foreign 
countries, including their investments. 

It is engaged in the practical peace 
task of maintaining peace conditions in 
which international trade and intercourse 
may flourish. It aims to promote peace 




in the interest of peaceful pursuits. It 
tries to achieve this end through its agents 
abroad and through various international 

These conferences relate to a variety of 
problems. We have participated in a 
series of meetings in Geneva relating to 
the reduction of arms. We have suc- 
ceeded in getting unconditional favored- 
nation treatment for our investors in 
Spain. We have participated in the larg- 
est international conference ever held, as- 
sociating ourselves with eighty different 
governments, concerned with problems af- 
fecting radiotelegraphy. We are at the 
present time negotiating commercial 
treaties with a score of countries. We are 
in conference at this moment with our 
sister republics to the south. We are deal- 
ing with complicated situations in China. 
Our Department of State is a peace so- 
ciety working at the job twenty-four hours 
of every day. 

The success of this organization is di- 
rectly attributable to the wisdom with 
which it handles realities. This wisdom 
is not an accident; it is carefully pre- 
pared for and guarded. As has been said, 
there is a solicitor. It is to this legal ad- 
visor, with his twenty-three assistants and 
a clerical staff, to whom is submitted a 
very large volume of questions, ranging 
over the entire field of legal jurispru- 
dence. This is why it is possible for the 
department to act effectively through its 
wide area of problems, involving diplo- 
matic claims, boundaries, aliens, con- 
tracts, official rights, shipping, citizen- 
ship, extradition, and many others. It is 
the solicitor, functioning as the legal ex- 
pert of the department, to whom the Sec- 
retary of State turns for advice and coun- 
sel in matters of Federal and State laws, 
or the laws of foreign countries, treaties, 
and international law. The solicitor finds 
that practically every case submitted to 
him involves the consideration and appli- 

cation of from one to four different legal 
tests — its relations to municipal law, to 
the laws of a foreign country, to treaty 
provisions, and to the principles of inter- 
national law. It is the solicitor who has 
charge of the duties of negotiating and 
drafting as well as construing treaties, 
conventions, proctocols, and executive 
agreements with foreign governments. 
The solicitor deals with legal questions in- 
volving millions of dollars of claims. 
Upon his recommendations our govern- 
ment admits or denies millions of dollars 
of claims. Upon his advice we present to 
foreign governments a variety of claims, 
often amounting to millions. The depart- 
ment, when it acts, acts with the advice 
of its legal department, headed by the 

This very effective peace society, which 
has grown up in our midst, quite outside 
the Constitution and in answer to definite 
needs, commands the attention and sup- 
port of every peace society concerned to 
advance the interests of justice between 

IACK of information about our De- 
J partment of State has a direct 
bearing upon the quality of our for- 
eign relations. We of the United States 
should know more of this department and 
its work. In particular, we should know 
that it is insufficiently manned and re- 
munerated. Out of 633 employees in the 
department, 79 per cent receive salaries 
below the average compensation for their 
grades. The inevitable result is an un- 
satisfactory morale and a disturbing turn- 
over in personnel. During 1927 the 
turnover in the stenographic section alone 
was 68 per cent, due almost entirely to a 
lack of adequate compensation. Clerks 
required to know French and Spanish 
and to have a "pretty thorough knowl- 
edge of American history" receive $1,680 




a year. Mr. Tyler Dennett, Chief of the 
Division of Publications, recently told the 
House Committee on Appropriations of a 
young woman engaged upon the archives, 
a graduate of Eadcliffe College, who had 
studied abroad and had several years' ex- 
perience teaching French and Spanish, 
rated on the civil list as a typist at $1,320 
a year. Salaries of men at the head of 
the important department divisions are 
wholly inadequate. The Undersecretary 
of State receives $7,500; the Solicitor, 
$7,000 ; the Chief Clerk, $4,200 ; Chief of 
the Division of Latin American Affairs, 
$6,000 ; Chief of the Division of European 
Affairs, $4,000; Chief of the Division of 
Publications, $4,200, one of the chiefs 
receiving as low as $3,600. Invaluable 
papers stored away in damp basements are 
going to tragic ruin because there is in- 
sufficient money properly to repair and 
to house them. 

countries are, we understand, the first to 
respond to the invitation of the League. 
It is reasonable to expect, however, that 
others will follow. 

\\/"HEN the League of Nations recom- 
* » mended the co-operation of States in 
the interest of the progressive extension 
of arbitration by means of special collec- 
tive agreements on the Locarno model, 
the recommendation aroused interest in 
various quarters. Both Sweden and Nor- 
way have submitted model draft treaties 
of conciliation and arbitration, proposing 
that all disputes between the contracting 
parties over the interpretation of treaties 
should go to the Permanent Court of In- 
ternational Justice. The drafts further 
provide, however, that parties in dispute 
may, if they choose, set up a judicial 
court of their own. Councils of concilia- 
tion are provided for in the case of politi- 
cal disputes. Both treaties provide for a 
recourse to the League of Nations under 
certain circumstances. Neither provides 
for any reservations as to the questions to 
be dealt with. The Norwegian treaties go 
the further in direction of compulsory 
arbitration. These two Scandinavian 

nPHE clarification of American views 
-^ relative to the Codification of Inter- 
national Law will be appreciably aided 
by the research in this field now under- 
taken by a group of American specialists 
in preparation for the Conference on the 
Codification of International Law, to be 
held at The Hague next year. These 
studies and research are to be conducted 
in co-operation with the special commit- 
tee set up two years ago by the League of 
Nations. The work will be under the 
direction of Prof. Manley 0. Hudson, of 
the Harvard Law School. It is to re- 
late to the problems of nationality, under 
the direction of Eichard F. Flournoy, 
of Washington; of territorial waters, un- 
der the chairmanship of Prof. Charles 
Grafton Wilson, of Harvard University; 
of the responsibility of States for dam- 
age done on their territory to the person 
or property of foreigners, this committee 
to be headed by Prof. Edwin Borchard, of 
Yale University. There is an Executive 
Committee composed of Joseph E. Beale, 
Manley 0. Hudson, Charles Cheney Hyde, 
Eldon E. James, Francis B. Sayre, James 
Brown Scott, and George W. Wickersham. 
The Advocate of Peace is pleased that 
this important work is to be done and by 
men of this standing. It regrets, how- 
ever, that they are not to act as official 
spokesmen for the United States Govern- 

THE invisible items, we have long be- 
lieved, have entered too little into the 
calculations of our international econo- 
mists. When told, as is frequently the 
case, that because we buy from abroad less 
than we export, that therefore it is physi- 
cally impossible for Europe to pay her 




debts to the United States, we have had 
our doubts. The "balance of trade" for- 
mula has never quite seemed convincing. 
We now know from the Department of 
Commerce that the invisible item of tour- 
ists' expenditures from abroad last year 
amounted to probably over $700,000,000. 
The Director of the United States Bureau 
of Foreign and Domestic Commerce has 
been quoted recently as saying that "if the 
whole of Europe had ratified the entire 
debt settlement agreement, the entire 

costs for the year would have been only 
$213,000,000. It was estimated that ap- 
proximately $375,000,000 was spent in 
France alone. Furthermore, it appears 
that while our trade with Europe fell off 
slightly last year, it has not fallen as 
much as European trade in other parts of 
the world. Furthermore, it is interesting 
to note, while our trade is increasing with 
Australia, England's trade with Aus- 
tralia is increasing also. 



ON DECEMBER 21, the Italian Gov- 
ernment promulgated a decree plac- 
ing the lira on the gold basis. Although 
this important step in Italy's financial 
policy has been expected for some time, the 
actual action of the government came as 
a surprise. 

Details of the Decree 

The decree fixed the following exchange 
rate of the lira as from December 22: 19 
to the dollar, 92.46 to the pound sterling. 

The gold parity is fixed at 7.919 grams 
of fine gold to 100 lire. No change is 
made in the validity of the silver and 
paper currency at present in circulation. 
The Bank of Italy is authorized to esti- 
mate its whole reserve of gold or foreign 
gold-standard currencies in Italian lire at 
the gold parity fixed by the decree. Any 
balance resulting from this revaluation of 
the Bank of Italy's reserve is to be placed 
to the credit of the State. The Bank of 
Italy must hold reserves in gold or foreign 
gold-standard currencies for not less than 
40 per cent of the value of its notes in 

Mussolini's Explanation of the Decree 

Signor Mussolini, in presenting the 
decree for the approval of the cabinet, 

recalled the passage in his speech at 
Pesaro in August, 1926, in which he de- 
clared his determination to defend the lira 
to the utmost; and then reviewed the re- 
sults of that pledge, culminating in the 
return to the gold standard. 

The revaluation policy had, he said, 
stopped, once for all, all speculation on the 
fall of the lira. An even higher revalua- 
tion would at present be possible, but un- 
desirable, because it might lead to inter- 
national speculation, would aggravate the 
economic crisis, and impose unbearable 
burdens on the State, and therefore on its 
citizens. The present value of the lira 
corresponded to the gold index of world 
prices, and represented the point at which 
State and private interests found the fair- 
est equilibrium. It had never been the 
intention of the Fascist Government to 
return to pre-war parity, but the estab- 
lishment of a gold standard was easier to 
achieve with a rising than with a falling 
currency value. 

The Council of Ministers, Signor Mus- 
solini concluded, could take the present 
decision with clear consciences, certain 
that it would close the period of exchange 
fluctuations and place Italy once more 
among the nations which enjoyed a stable 
exchange. Italy's return to a gold stand- 
ard would not only have a profound effect 
upon the development of national econ- 
omy, but would contribute toward the 




definite and peaceful reconstruction of 
world economy. 

Collaboration of Foreign Banks 

In explaining the measures taken for 
the accomplishment of this important step, 
before a meeting of the cabinet, Count 
Volpi, the Minister of Finance, told how 
the Bank of Italy, following the example 
of the Bank of England in 1924, had, 
before taking the present step, assured 
for itself the collaboration of the interna- 
tional banking world. He outlined the 
negotiations recently concluded in London 
between Signor Stringher, director gen- 
eral of the Bank of Italy, the governor of 
the Bank of England, and representatives 
of American Banking. The Bank of Italy 
would in all probability have to avail itself 
of the credits for a total of $125,000,000. 
The return to a gold standard did not. 
Count Volpi continued, constitute a solu- 
tion of all Italian economic difficulties. 
The efforts to reorganize industry and 
agriculture must continue unabated, but 
in the long run the country could not fail 
to reap incalculable benefits from the 
present decision. 

The Bank of Italy has arranged special 
agreements with a group of the central 
banks, headed by the Bank of England 
and by the Federal Reserve Bank, for a 
credit of $75,000,000, and with a group 
of ordinary banks, headed by J. P. Mor- 
gan, for a further credit of $50,000,000. 
These credits are at its disposal for the 
defense of the new Italian gold lira (new 
parity). With these credits Italy wiU 
have in gold or its equivalent 16,497,000,- 
000 lire, against 17,500,000,000 lire 
(nearly) of notes, which gives a propor- 
tion of about 94 per cent. 


THE financial policy of France is defi- 
nitely headed in the direction of a 
legal stabilization of the franc. With Bel- 
gium on a stable monetary basis for over 
a year and with Italy on a gold basis, it 
becomes increasingly difficult for the 
French Government to delay the final step 
in formally placing the currency on a 
stable basis, since in reality the franc has 
been stable for nearly a year and a half. 

Two important events have recently taken 
place which indicate the approach of 
stabilization. These were the adoption of 
a balanced budget for the next fiscal year 
and the promulgation of a decree per- 
mitting the export of capital; but, on the 
other hand, the financial and political sit- 
uation in France is such that the final 
step may still be delayed for some months 
to come. 

The Budget for 1928 

The financial bill, embodying the budget 
for 1928, did not pass the two chambers of 
the French Parliament without much de- 
bate and bitter controversy. The Cham- 
ber passed the bill on December 12, but 
the Senate took exception to several items, 
with the result that the final passage of 
the bill was delayed until December 26. 
The final figures of the budget are as fol- 
lows: Revenues, 42,496,616,196 francs; 
expenditures, 42,441,457,260 francs. This 
leaves a surplus of 55 million francs, 
which, it is expected, wiU be used up for 
extra expenditures. 

In a comprehensive review of the bud- 
get, prepared for the Senate by its re- 
porter, M. Henry Cheron, every 100 francs 
paid by the French taxpayer is applied as 
follows : 


Public debt and sinking fund .... 41.50 
Old age, war, and war victims' 

pensions 16.44 

Civil and military personnel 16.44 

National defense 15.61 

Public authorities 0.15 

Civil expenditure 7.25 

New public works 0.70 

Social insurance and relief 1.85 

International expenditure 0.06 

Total 100.00 

It is, of course, not possible to judge the 
exact meaning of these figures without 
more detailed information than is at pres- 
ent available; but, accepting them as a 
rough indication, they show, as they are 
obviously meant to show, the extent to 
which France is burdened with debt and 
pensions arising directly out of the war 
and the reaction of this burden upon the 
present and future welfare of the country. 
The figures indicate that considerably 




more, than half the revenue is devoted to 
paying for the war and its consequences, 
and that military expenditure as such does 
not occupy in the French budget the 
formidable position generally supposed. 
M. Cheron observes with satisfaction that 
at least there has been no new increase in 
the debt, and that as the result of the 
various consolidating operations the pub- 
lic has been relieved of disturbing fluctua- 
tions and the treasury has reaped con- 
siderable advantage. 

Export of Capital 

The question of introducing freedom of 
export of capital has been one that has 
received a great deal of discussion. 
France has maintained through the whole 
post-war period more or less stringent gov- 
ernment regulation of the movement of 
capital; but lately there has been a rather 
insistent demand that this system be re- 

The question was raised in the course 
of the debate on the budget, and on De- 
cember 13, in replying to M. Margaine, 
a Socialist-Eadical deputy, who asked for 
the removal of restrictions, M. Poincare 
said that the governor of the Bank of 
France was opposed to liberty of export. 
The Prime Minister added that personally 
he was trying to re-establish freedom of 
export, but in the present period of finan- 
cial restoration the government should be 
in agreement with the bank of isue as to 
the time at which freedom of export can be 
restored. He asked the Chamber to have 
confidence and leave it to the government 
to choose the proper moment. 

The government chose this "proper 
moment" about a month later, and France 
now has free export of capital, which is a 
necessary prerequisite to legal stabilization 
of the currency. There seems little doubt, 
however, that this measure was taken as 
a means of testing the situation. The 
huge reserves of foreign currency held by 
the Bank of France have been accumu- 
lated largely through an influx of foreign 
capital since the de facto stabilization. It 
is obviously necessary for the government 
and the Bank of France to test in some 
way how much of this capital is likely to 
leave the country again. 


THE Agent General for Separation 
Payments has issued his report on the 
third year of the operation of the Dawes 
Plan. The report is dated December 10 
and the general observations extend into 
the first few months of the fourth year. 
These observations have been awaited with 
eagerness in consequence of the warnings 
contained in the interim report of last 
June and the striking criticisms of Ger- 
man public finance which the agent gen- 
eral conveyed in a special memorandum on 
October 20 (which is published in full, 
together with the German Government's 
reply, as an appendix to the annual re- 
port). If the observations are, as was 
expected, expressed in somewhat milder 
terms than the memorandum, the agent 
general adheres firmly to the general 
views he has already expressed. He takes 
note of the various admissions in the Ger- 
man reply to the memorandum, of the 
various reforms announced, and of the im- 
provements already effected during the 
last two months, and expresses the hope 
that they foreshadow a period of sounder 
finance in the interests both of Germany 
and of the Dawes Plan. 

During the six months that have elapsed 
since the presentation of the interim re- 
port, the agent general says, the plan has 
continued to function normally in the 
field of reparation payments and trans- 
fers; the latter have gone forward regu- 
larly and currently without disturbance to 
the exchange and to an increasing extent 
in the form of foreign currency payments. 
During these same months, however, the 
dangerous tendencies which had already 
appeared developed still further. "It ac- 
cordingly became necessary, on October 
20, 1927, for the Agent General for Eep- 
aration Payments to present to the Ger- 
man Government a memorandum" to draw 
attention to the dangers which these ten- 
dencies seemed to involve for the German 
economy and the Experts'' Plan. It will 
be noticed that the agent general makes 
no references to a request by the German 
Government for the presentation of the 




Foreign Borrowings and the Budget 

After a brief summary of the memoran- 
dum, the agent general turns to the Ger- 
man reply, which, he says, expressed its 
general agreement with the need for econ- 
omy in public finance, and stated that if 
the plans which the government was mak- 
ing could be successfully carried out, the 
period of high extraordinary expenditures 
by the Eeich might be looked upon as 
closed. The reply also indicated the in- 
tention of the government to work for ad- 
ministrative reform and for a better de- 
velopment of the finances of the States 
and communes, and a better organization 
of their foreign borrowings. "It is to be 
hoped that actual results will follow along 
these lines, and already some positive steps 
have been taken." 

In the section devoted to the budget Mr. 
Gilbert recalls his various earlier warn- 
ings and again points out that the last two 
Eeich budgets have not been soundly 
balanced. He suggests that the lesson was 
driven home only when the government 
tried to borrow in an exhausted home mar- 
ket to cover its extraordinary expenditures. 
But, whatever the cause, a change was 
made. The results, as seen in the draft 
budget for 1928-29, which has become 
available early enough this year for treat- 
ment in his report, he finds welcome and 
promising, particularly the reduction of 
the extraordinary expenditure — 471,000,- 
000 marks last year to 176,000,000 marks 
with no fresh authorization to borrow. 
He also welcomes the simplifications in 
the accounting system. Although these 
changes do not represent much advance in 
the essential control of expenditure, he re- 
gards them, together with recent evidences 
of more resistance to new expenditure in 
other ways, as an encouraging sign. 

Moreover, he calls attention to indica- 
tions that public opinion in Germany is 
becoming more and more united on the 
opportunities for administrative reform 
which undoubtedly exist, and welcomes 
the conference of State premiers sum- 
moned for next month to consider them, 
as well as the efforts of the Foreign Loans 
Advisory Committee to obtain by means 
of questionnaires a comprehensive survey 
of the total loan requirements of States 
and municipalities. 

The agent general expresses, but with- 

out very strong conviction, the hope that 
the lead given by the Eeich will be fol- 
lowed by the States and communes, whose 
extravagance he continues to criticize. 
He makes an interesting comparison be- 
tween the restraint on private and public 
borrowing. In the case of the local pub- 
lic bodies, he mentions such considerations 
as "matters of prestige of one city against 
another, questions of social or political ad- 
vantage/' which do not influence the pri- 
vate borrower, who is guided by plain 
business principles. He also points out 
that, owing to the inflation. State and 
municipal debts in Germany, even after 
revalorization, remain relatively low, a 
consideration which influences the foreign 
banker, for the service of whose loan the 
general taxing power can be relied upon. 
The distribution among the States of rev- 
enue collected by the Eeich under the 
present provisional system is criticized 
along the now familiar lines, especially in 
view of the increased revenue expected 
next year, which may tempt the States and 
communes to expand their expenditures to 
keep pace with the increasing transfers 
from the Eeich and lead to their being 
unwilling in any final settlement to take 
less than the maximum they have received 
under the provisional system. 

Problem of Transfers 

In an important section on transfer, Mr. 
Gilbert reasserts the legal claim of the 
Eeparation Commission and the Transfer 
Committee to the priority of reparation 
payments and transfers. He points out 
that the only German public loan which 
has been excepted from this provision 
under Article 248 of the Versailles Treaty 
is the German external loan of 1924. 
Fifteen State loans have been placed 
abroad so far, and in no case has applica- 
tion been made for such an exception. In 
only one case, the Prussian loan of 1926, 
was the loan formally brought to the at- 
tention of the reparation authorities. On 
that occasion Mr. Parker Gilbert replied, 
stating that he had consistently advised 
both the Eeich Finance Minister and the 
issuing bankers that, in the absence of an 
express exception by the Eeparation Com- 
mission, an external loan of the State of 
Prussia must be regarded as ranking sec- 
ondary to reparations. In the case of the 




external loan, the Eeparation Commission 
had granted a priority over reparation pay- 
ments, "and the Transfer Committee, by 
appropriate resolution, recognized that 
priority as against the transfer of repara- 

In the absence of an application for an 
exception, the Transfer Committee under- 
stood that the secondary character of the 
Prussian loan was recognized. In the 
same letter exception was takan to the 
wording of the prospectus "unless quali- 
fied ^y reference to the priority of repara- 
tion payments and transfers."" In fact, 
whenever the question has arisen the rep- 
aration authorities have fully reserved the 
legal rights of the creditor powers and 
have made it quite clear that they regard 
all the State loans as secondary in respect 
of transfer as well as of payments. 

Future of the Plan 

In his conclusions Mr. Gilbert touches 
upon the future of the Dawes Plan. He 
points out that the Experts' Plan estab- 
lished a protected system, designed to 
safeguard the German exchange and se- 
cure the maximum of transfers without 
involving a general control over Ger- 
many's affairs. It is fundamental to the 
experts' conception that the plan should 
be given a fair test, during which Ger- 
many should exercise prudence and not 
dissipate her resources and credits through 
overspending and overborrowing by the 
public authorities. The assurances con- 
tained in the government's reply to the 
memorandum furnish a basis for proceed- 
ing with the test of practical experience. 

In forming judgments, the weaknesses 
of the protected system must be considered. 
Transfer protection tends to save the Ger- 
man public authorities from some of the 
consequences of their actions, and the un- 
certainty as to the total amount of the 
reparation liabilities inevitably tends 
everywhere in Germany to diminish the 
normal incentive to do the things and 
carry out the reforms that would be clearly 
in the country's own interests. The re- 
port regarded the protected system as a 
means to meet an urgent problem. The 
only alternative is the final determination 
of Germany's liabilities on an absolute 
basis that contemplates no measure of 
transfer protection. The experts did 

not — indeed, could not — say when they 
considered such a settlement would be- 
come possible, but they described their 
plan as providing "a settlement extending 
in its application for a sufficient time to 
restore confidence." 
Mr. Gilbert concludes : 

We are still in the testing period, and 
further experience is needed. . . . But 
confidence in the general sense is already 
restored, and the proof of it is present on 
many sides. ... As time goes on and 
practical experience accumulates, it becomes 
clearer that neither the reparation problem 
nor the other problems depending on it will 
be finally solved until Germany has been 
given a definite task to perform on her own 
responsibility, without foreign supervision 
and without transfer protection. This, I be- 
lieve, is the principal lesson to be drawn from 
the past three years, and it should be con- 
stantly in the minds of all concerned as the 
execution of the plan continues to unfold. 


ON DECEMBER 4 the Italian Parlia- 
ment ratified by acclamation the 
treaty of Tirana, signed on November 27, 
1926, and the Italo- Albanian Treaty of 
Defensive Alliance, signed on November 
22, 1927. The two treaties are now in 
full force. 

Mussolini on the Albanian Problem 

In presenting the second treaty to Par- 
liament, Signor Mussolini appended to it 
a report on the Albanian situation and 
the wisdom, from Italy's point of view, of 
the two treaties. 

Had Italy really desired to apply the 
Treaty of Tirana in the manner mali- 
ciously attributed to her, Signor Mus- 
solini pointed out, it would have been suffi- 
cient for her to allow the threatening sit- 
uation which arose between Yugoslavia 
and Albania last March to develop. By 
sounding a note of warning on this occa- 
sion Italy proved that she desired not only 
the peaceful application of the treaty, but 
was anxious to collaborate with all the 
interested powers in assuring the main- 
tenance of peaceful relations between Al- 
bania and her neighbors. The Duce re- 
stated the pacific intention of the treaty 




and Italy's fundamental need to guarantee 
through the independence of Albania her 
own security in the Adriatic. "Italy," he 
said in conclusion, "finds in the Treaty of 
Tirana the conditions necessary for the 
liberty of her commerce and the safety of 
her shores, which means conditions neces- 
sary to establish her equilibrium, liberty, 
and security in other seas.** On these 
grounds she is convinced that she has 
added a further factor toward the main- 
tenance of that peace upon which her 
policy of development and reconstruction 
is based. 

In a short speech the rapporteur of the 
treaty, Signor Torre, compared the respec- 
tive positions of Italy and Albania with 
those of Great Britain and Belgium. The 
independence of Albania is, he considered, 
of even greater importance to Italy than 
is that of Belgium to Great Britain, be- 
cause the latter is the strongest naval 
power and has no land frontiers to protect. 
Were the independence of Albania not 
guaranteed, a situation similar to that of 
Macedonia would inevitably arise. Italy's 
justification, if nothing else, lies in the 
fact that during the last 40 years it had 
been Balkan incidents which had most fre- 
quently upset the peace of Europe. 

The Reaction in Yugoslavia 

According to the Belgrade correspon- 
dent of the Central European Observer, 
Yugoslav public opinion was not greatly 
disturbed by the new treaty between Italy 
and Albania, since it has not really 
changed the situation created by the 
Treaty of Tirana. Moreover, the Yugo- 
slavs believe that the present President of 
Albania, who may soon become King, is 
a man of tremendous cunning and can be 
counted upon eventually to drive the 
Italians out, just as they were thrown out 
of Valona some years ago. 


SYRIA has cost France much life and 
treasure and has given her in return 
"a lonely and thankless furrow to plow," 
according to a British observer, who has 
recently visited the mandated territory. 
One of the greatest difficulties faced by the 
mandatory power was Syria's lack of 

homogeneity. Lebanon, already for 50 
years accustomed to a form of independ- 
ence, was Christian with a strong Moslem 
and Druse minority. Jebel Hauran was 
Druse, the home of warlike Arab nomads 
with a form of Unitarianism, neither 
Christian nor Moslem, as a religion, whose 
nature it was to live according to their own 
lights and customs and whose inaccessi- 
bility had ever rendered the imposition of 
foreign control in any form hazardous and 
difficult. Major Syria, the provinces of 
Damascus and Aleppo, was Arab and 
Orthodox. The Alouites, the "moun- 
tainy" folk of the northwest, were yet an- 
other separate entity. 

It is no secret that in 1919 many 
Frenchmen looked askance at the accept- 
ance of responsibilities so foreign to their 
national genius and so fraught with ill- 
assorted problems. To begin with, there 
was never an idea of Syrian unity. The 
country lacked the elements of cohesion, 
and the French rightly concentrated on a 
policy of a federation of self-governing 
States under an ever-lessening mandatory 
control. Syrian history since the Armis- 
tice is the story of the evolution of this 

The Damascus Rising 

As a beginning, they retained the exist- 
ing organizations of Occupied Enemy Ter- 
ritory Administration, replacing British 
by French officers to assist and guide the 
native personnel on behalf of the man- 
datory. But within nine months trouble 
had started in Damascus as a result of the 
Emir Feisal's subscribing to the cry of 
the Nationalist Party for independence 
"without any form of foreign interfer- 
ence." Feisal was expelled and his gov- 
ernment abolished. Having thus cleared 
the air, the French were ready to embark 
upon their federation policy, and in the 
winter of 1920 the Lebanon was declared 
independent and three autonomous gov- 
ernments were established in the Damas- 
cus, Aleppo, and Alouite provinces. 

Meanwhile the Turks had begun raid- 
ing across the frontier, which then ran 
north of Cilicia to the Euphrates. The 
raids quickly became a war, and the out- 
come was the Franklin-Bouillon-Mustapha 
Kemal agreement and an economically un- 
sound readjustment of the frontier on a 




line just north of Aleppo. In making this 
arrangement with Angora the French 
acted independently of their allies, with 
results disastrous for all Western interests 
in the Near East. The immediate local 
reaction was a rising of the Alouites round 
Antioch and a year of exhausting guerilla 
fighting before mandatory authority was 
re-established in the district. 

Federation Policy 

On the return of peace, however, the 
French were able to resume their federal 
policy and in 1922 followed up the 1920 
arrangement by promulgating the federa- 
tion of the three autonomous States under 
a Federal Council responsible to the man- 
datory. A year and a half of non-co- 
operation and racial and religious jeal- 
ousies sufficed to prove the scheme un- 
workable; the federation and its council 
were abolished; Aleppo and Damascus 
were amalgamated into one administra- 
tive unit, and the country reverted to de- 
centralized government. The next crisis 
was the outbreak of the Druse rebellion in 
the south and southeast, which dragged on 
for eighteen months. 

M. de Jouvenel succeeded General Sar- 
rail, whom the Druse rebellion had un- 
seated. He celebrated the conclusion of 
a twelve months' mission of pacification by 
surprisingly endowing the Lebanon with a 
complicated and top-heavy Parliamentary 
regime. This body, at his departure, 
rushed into opposition against the man- 
datory over certain provisions of the Leb- 
anese budget; whereupon M. Ponsot, the 
new High Commissioner, had the un- 
pleasant task of bringing it to reason. 
He then went on leave to Paris, which, 
orientalwise, was interpreted as fore- 
shadowing a change in French policy ; but 
his only pronouncement since his return 
has been to reaffirm the idea of federation. 

British Impressions 

The British observer sums up his im- 
pressions of mandated Syria in the fol- 
lowing words: 

Syria makes curious impressions on the 
British traveler. He will be as embarrassed 
by the unvarnished French condemnation of 
our mandatory vagaries as by the stories told 
by Lebanese notables, Maronite priests, and 
Damascus waiters of how the French are 

driving the country to the dogs. He will 
instinctively react against the ubiquitous 
policing of French troops, mostly black. He 
will be shocked that an anachronistic cen- 
sorship still cramps the activities of, among 
others, reputable and recognized foreign 
journalists. But on the balance his sym- 
pathies will be with the French in their un- 
grateful duties, in their past experiences, and 
in their anxieties for a future which is still 


TWO outstanding events took place in 
southern China during the month of 
December. In the first place. General 
Chiang Kai-Shek returned to active par- 
ticipation in public affairs and was named 
virtual dictator of the territory held by 
the Nationalists. In the second place, 
the government formed under his direc- 
tion, influenced by a Communist uprising 
in Canton, broke off relations with Mos- 

Communist Uprising in Canton 

The city of Canton was seized by Com- 
munists on December 10. While they re- 
mained in control only three days, their 
short reign and the series of fights by 
means of which the government troops 
finally dislodged them almost reduced the 
city to ruins. 

The experience which Canton under- 
went is said to be the worst in living 
memory. It is estimated that 70 per cent 
of the shops were wholly or partially 
looted and the damage caused by fire was 
serious. The Central Bank was destroyed, 
but the strong room and its contents, it 
is reported, have been found intact, while 
the post office and customs were untouched, 
and no attempt was made to molest for- 
eigners. A Chinese correspondent during 
a walk of one mile counted over 200 

The rapidity with which government 
troops acted in dealing with the Canton 
situation undoubtedly prevented the 
spread of the Communist movement to 
other portions of the Nationalist territory. 
Plans were discovered for a more or less 
concerted Communist rising in several im- 
portant centers. 




The following communique was issued 
by the Nationalist Government: 

Under the instigation and direction of the 
Russian Soviet consul in Canton on the night 
of December 10, 1927, the Communists, to- 
gether with the local bandits and some few 
disloyal soldiers, ransacked the city of Can- 
ton, setting on fire important business sec- 
tions, occupying administrative offices, rob- 
bing, raping, and murdering. The govern- 
ment of Canton on the night of December 12, 
with the revolutionary army under the leader- 
ship of Chang Fah-hui [Chang Fat-Kwai], 
Huang Chi-chang, Li Fu-lin, Hsueh Au, and 
Chu Hui-yet, successfully and completely de- 
feated and destroyed Communism in Canton. 
Peace and order were restored on the follow- 
ing day. 

Break with Moscow 

As a result of the Canton uprising, the 
Nationalist Government ordered the clos- 
ing down in all of the Nationalist terri- 
tory of Eussian consulates and other gov- 
ernmental agencies and the deportation 
of their personnel. A note to this effect 
was sent to the Eussian Government, 
which in reply sent the following note, 
signed by Chicherin, the Commissary of 
Foreign Affairs: 

The Soviet Government has never recog- 
nized the so-called Nationalist Government 
at Nanking, on whose behalf was handed 
to the Soviet consulate in Shanghai the note 
of December 15. The Nationalist Govern- 
ment at Nanking must know that all the 
consulates of the U. S. S. R. exist on Chinese 
territory by virtue of the treaty between 
China and the Soviet Union signed in Peking 
in 1924, and that every appointment of con- 
suls at Shanghai as well as at any other 
point in China occurred with the knowledge 
and agreement of the Peking Government. 
The Shanghai authorities, just as any other 
local Chinese authorities, merely took cogni- 
zance of those appointments. [The Peking 
Government broke off relations with the 
Soviet following the raid on the Soviet com- 
pound in Peking.] 

Therefore the statement contained in the 
note of the "Nationalist Government" at 
Nanking terminating the recognition of the 
consuls in the various provinces can only 

mean that the generals who have seized 
power in Nanking have, under pressure from 
the Imperialists, found it convenient to have 
in the area under their control mainly con- 
suls of those countries which have main- 
tained "the unequal treaties" with the Chi- 

The Soviet Government must most em- 
phatically reject the unproved statements, 
contained in the note of December 15 that 
the Soviet consulates and State commercial 
agencies are being used for Red propaganda 
and as refuges for Communists. 

Particularly we must most emphatically 
reject the charge against our consulate in 
Canton, which is alleged to have served as 
a basis for directing the revolutionary move- 
ment of workers and peasants in Kwangtung, 
It is no novel thing for the revolutionary 
movement of the workers and peasants in 
China to be looked upon as a result of the 
activities of official Soviet institutions. For 
several years now the enemies of the Chinese 
people, Imperialists in all countries, have, 
viewed the great revolutionary movement of 
the Chinese people as a result of the in- 
trigues of "alien forces." The fact that the 
"Nationalist Goverimaent" at Nanking is now 
repeating the counter-revolutionary legend of 
the oppressors of the Chinese people is the 
best evidence as to whose will it is now 

The Soviet Government is convinced that 
the position taken up by the Chinese authori- 
ties in Shanghai above all prejudices the 
Chinese people and China's national interests, 
and that those who so lightly embark on a 
policy hostile to the U. S. S. R. will be the 
first to feel its negative consequences. 

In a communication acknowledging the 
receipt of this note. Dr. Wu, the National- 
ist Minister of Foreign Affairs, pointed 
out that the Nationalist possess docu- 
ments from the Canton consulate showing 
Moscow's complicity in the catastrophe 
there. The purport of these documents 
is that the disarmament of the gentry 
classes must take place in accordance with 
the program of the agrarian revolution 
and that the poor class of peasants were 
to be armed. The friendship of National- 
ists toward the Communist Party and the 
Soviet in the past was due to the belief 




that these latter were sincere in their sym- 
pathy for the Chinese Nationalists move- 
ment, but recent events fully showed that 
the Soviet had attempted to denationalize 
the Nationalist movement with the object 
of converting China into a mere appan- 
age of the Soviet Union. Elementary con- 
siderations of self-defense required a re- 
moval of centers of hostile activity. 

Dr. Wu mentions that he gave warning 
last June, but the warning had no effect. 
He concludes: "In taking this purely de- 
fensive measure, it is immaterial to us 
whom such action happens to please or 

Chicherin Blames Great Britain 

On December 23 Chicherin issued a 
statement, in which he said: 

The People's Commissariat for Foreign 
Affairs has repeatedly had to point out that 
whenever a revolutionary movement occurs 
in any country the enemies of the Soviet 
Union invariably declare it has been pro- 
voked by agents of the Soviet Government 
Thus, the counter-revolutionary generals in 
that country who have drowned in torrents 
of blood the great revolt of the workers in 
Canton, heaping the corpses of tortured 
workers in the streets, have manifested 
especial hatred toward the Soviet citizens 
who were in Canton and who were among 
the first of innumerable victims. 

But although the crimes of the Canton 
generals against the Soviet Union are unpre- 
cedentedly serious, the heavy responsibility 
for these cannot be confined to Canton. The 
political responsibility for these atrocities 
rests on all persons in the region of so-called 
"Nationalist" governments. Not only Gen- 
erals Chang Fat-kwei and Li Fu-ling, who 
acted at Canton, but also others, such as Li 
Chi-sheng, Chiang Kai-shek, and Pei Chung- 
shi, are guilty of these crimes. 

Responsibility also falls on other forces of 
world reaction which are hostile to the Soviet 
Union. It may be said that a decisive factor 
in causing these events was the instigation 
by all the Imperialist and "White Guardist" 
groups in Shanghai, Hongkong, and other 
centers of colonial policy in China, and by 
Inspiration from London. This fact was per- 

fectly clear, and has now been confirmed by 
the jubilations of the English press. 

British Imperialist reaction must be recog- 
nized as the chief motive force of the Canton 
slaughter and the acts of violence perpe- 
trated on Soviet citizens. The toilers of the 
Soviet Union are deeply afflicted at the death 
of their comrades, tortured by henchmen of 
the South Chinese counter-revolutionaries, 
but their martyr blood has not been shed in 

The Soviet Government sees in the bar- 
barous acts of the Chinese counter-revolu- 
tionaries and of the forces standing behind 
them an open attack on the Soviet Union. 
While immutably pursuing its policy of peace, 
a new expression of which was the proposal 
for general disarmament made recently at 
Geneva, the Soviet Union is at the same time 
ready for the worst and will not be taken 
unawares. On behalf of the Soviet Govern- 
ment, the People's Commissariat for I'oreign 
Affairs protests before the whole world 
against the outrages of the Chinese counter- 
revolutionaries. The Soviet Government re- 
serves the right to undertake all measures 
which it may deem necessary in view of the 
bloody crimes committed in South China 
against the Union. These savage acts can- 
not remain unpunished. 


'T^HE Nobel Peace Prize this year was 
-■- awarded, as was last year's prize, to 
two persons. They were Prof. Ludwig 
Quidde, of Germany, and M. Ferdinand 
Buisson, of France. Following are the 
biographies of these two workers for 
world peace : 

Professor Quidde 

Dr. Ludwig Quidde was born in Bre- 
men in 1858. He studied history at the 
Universities of Strasburg and Gottingen. 
After taking his doctor's degree in 1881, 
he spent some years in Frankfurt, Konigs- 
berg, and Munich working on old Ger- 
man parliamentary records. In 1890 he 
founded and published for six years a his- 
torical review, the Deutsche Zeitschrift 
fiir Geschichtswissenschaft. 




From 1893 onward Dr. Quidde took an 
increasingly prominent part in the demo- 
c itic and pacifist movements. In 1894 
h : caused considerable excitement by pub- 
lishing a study entitled "Caligula," which 
contained some sharp criticism of the 
joung Kaiser Wilhelm II and his methods 
•oi government. The book went through 
30 editions. Dr. Quidde continued to 
write along the same lines and in 1896 he 
was sentenced to three months' imprison- 
ment for lese-majeste. Later he became 
.a town councilor in Munich, and in 1907 
he was elected to the Bavarian Second 
Chamber. After the revolution in 1918 
he was vice-president of the Bavarian 
Provisional Council and he also attended 
the Weimar Assembly. 

The international peace movement has, 
Jiowever, absorbed even more of Dr. 
Quidde's attention than home politics. 
He founded the Munich Peace Society in 
1894 and has been a member of the Inter- 
national Peace Committee since 1901. 
Dr. Quidde is now the leader of the Ger- 
man pacifist movement, being president of 
the German Peace Society. His pen has 
Always been active in the cause of peace 
and it got him into trouble for the second 
time in 1924. 

Although a convinced pacifist, Dr. 
Quidde has never shared the view of some 
of the more fanatical German pacifists, 
that the best way to serve the cause of 
peace is to work against their own coun- 
try. He is gifted with a certain dry hu- 
mor which has generally preserved him 
from exaggerations. His feelings with 
regard to the treaty of Versailles and the 
Ruhr occupation were hardly distinguish- 
.able from those of the Nationalists. Early 
in 1924 he came to the conclusion that 
the activities of the illegal semi-military 
Nationalist organizations were merely pro- 
viding the French with the very material 
as to the failure of Germany to disarm 
which they desired as pretexts for main- 
taining measures of coercion. He wrote 
:an article to this effect, expressing at the 
.same time the opinion that the higher 

military authorities were not responsible 
for these harmful activities, but hinting 
that Germany's position would be im- 
proved if the illegal organizations were 
not shielded by certain other authorities 
particularly as the Allied governments 
knew all about them. 

Dr. Quidde had some difficulty in get- 
ting any newspaper to publish the article. 
Eventually it appeared in the pacifist Welt 
am Montag in Berlin. The extreme Na- 
tionalists in Bavaria, against whom it was 
chiefly directed, were furious, and the 
Munich judicial authorities were prevailed 
upon to have Dr. Quidde arrested on a 
charge of treason, for which he was in- 
formed he might receive a death sentence. 
His treatment while under detention in 
Bavarian prisons was harsh, and he 
claimed afterwards that it was contrary 
to a number of regulations. He was not 
even taken before a magistrate for three 
days. Eventually it was found impos- 
sible to uphold the charge. 

M. Buisson 

M. Ferdinand Biiisson was born in 
Paris in 1841 and educated at the College 
of Argentan and the Saint-Etienne and 
Condorcet Lycees. From 1866 to 1870 he 
taught in Switzerland, and in 1871 he 
returned to France and was appointed 
inspector of schools. His advocacy of 
non-sectarian education met with strong 
opposition, and he was forced to resign 
after being denounced in the National 
Assembly. In 1875 he was sent as official 
delegate to the Vienna Exhibition and in 
1876 and 1878 he carried out similar 
duties at the Philadelphia and Paris ex- 
hibitions. He became director of primary 
education in 1879 and successfully re- 
sumed his campaign in favor of non-sec- 
tarian schools. M. Buisson entered Par- 
liament as Deputy for the Seine in 1902 
and became a Senator in 1919. After the 
war he became a leading figure in the 
movement for peace and conciliation, pre- 
sided over the dinner at which M. Caillaux 
was welcomed back to public life, and be- 
came president of the Ligue des Droits de 
I'Homme. He has published several 
works on political and educational sub- 
jects, is a Commander of the Legion of 
Honor, and holds the degrees of Agrege 
de Philosophic and Docteur es Lettres. 





LAST December a unique type of re- 
i search and training center in the 
humanistic sciences was established in 
Washington. This center, which has been 
named the Brookings Institution, is the 
outgrowth of experimentation in research 
and training conducted at the National 
Capital for some years past by the Insti- 
tute of Economics, the Institute for Gov- 
ernment Kesearch, and the Eobert Brook- 
ings Graduate School of Economics and 
Government. The institution is to have 
an international as well as national scope. 

Purposes of the Institution 

The new institution, which is the 
amalgamation of the three existing agen- 
cies, is designed to cover eventually the 
whole range of the humanistic, or social, 
sciences, providing facilities for research 
and for advanced research training in such 
subjects as economics, government ad- 
ministration, political relations, history, 
law, and social organization. The Insti- 
tute of Economics and the Institute for 
Government Eesearch will retain their 
names and continue their activities as 
divisions of the Brookings Institution; 
similar institutes devoted to other 
branches of the humanistic sciences are in 

The Brookings Institution will be 
unique in its provision for a series of spe- 
cialized research institutes equipped to 
carry out comprehensive and interrelated 
research programs. Such researches are 
expected not only to promote a greater 
realism in economic, social, and political 
thought, but also to render important 
service in connection with public affairs. 

In its training function, the institution 
will not attempt to give an ordinary 
graduate training leading to a Ph. D. de- 
gree. The design is rather to extend the 
period of research training and of re- 
search opportunity to those who have 
already completed the formal work of 
graduate schools. By providing an op- 
portunity for selected young scholars to 
spend from one to three years in a well- 
equipped research organization, the gradu- 
ate work now done by universities will be 

A third major purpose of the institu- 
tion is to provide headquarters for visiting 
scholars from both the United States and 
foreign countries. Increasingly, students 
from all over the world come to Washing- 
ton to pursue research work in the field of 
the humanistic sciences. The National 
Capital is a vast repository of materials 
bearing upon economic, political, histori- 
cal, social, administrative, and legal prob- 
lems. It is not merely the materials which 
are to be found in the great collections of 
published books and documents in the 
Library of Congress and in the libraries 
of the various departments of the govern- 
ment and of specialized institutions in 
Washington that are important. Of even 
greater significance to the student of the 
living processes of economic, social, and 
political life are the materials contained 
in the records and files of the regular de- 
partments of the government — of such 
official agencies as the Federal Reserve 
Board, the Federal Trade Commission, the 
Bureau of Agricultural Economics, the 
Interstate Commerce Commission, and the 
Supreme Court of the United States, and 
of unofficial agencies such as the Chamber 
of Commerce of the United States, the 
Bureau of Railway Economics, the Ameri- 
can Federation of Labor, the International 
Labor Office, and the innumerable trade 
associations whose headquarters are lo- 
cated in the capital. The Brookings Insti- 
tution will endeavor to enable such 
scholars to realize the maximum oppor- 
tunities which the capital affords. 

Officers and Finances 

The institution is named in honor of 
Robert S. Brookings, formerly of St. Louis 
and during recent years a prominent 
figure in the National Capital, well known 
for his war service and as the founder 
of the separate institutions which form 
the nucleus of the new Brookings Insti- 
tution. An endowment of several million 
dollars is already assured. 

The trustees who are responsible for 
the formation of the Brookings Institu- 
tion are as follows : 

Robert S. Brookings, President, Washing- 
ton University Corporation. 

Leo S. Rowe, Director General, Pan Ameri- 
can Union. 




Frederic A. Delano, formerly member of 
Federal Reserve Board. 

Arthur T. Hadley, President Emeritus, 
Yale University. 

John C. Merriam, President, Carnegie In- 
stitution of Washington. 

Jerome D. Greene, Lee, Higginson and 
Company, New York City. 

Whitefoord R. Cole, President, Louisville 
and Nashville Railroad. 

Frank J. Goodnow, President, Johns Hop- 
kins University. 

Samuel Mather, Pickards, Mather and 
Company, Cleveland. 

John Barton Payne, Chairman, American 
Red Cross. 

George Eastman, President, Eastman Ko- 
dak Company. 

Vernon Kellogg, Permanent Secretary, Na- 
tional Research Council. 

Ernest M. Hopkins, President, Dartmouth 

Harold G. Moulton, Director, Institute of 

Raymond B. Fosdick, Curtis, Fosdick and 
Belknap, New York City. 

Bolton Smith, President, Bolton Smith and 
Company, Memphis. 

Paul M. Warburg, Chairman, International 
Acceptance Bank, Kew York City. 

David F. Houston, President, Mutual Life 
Insurance Company, formerly Secretary of 
the Treasury. 

The officers of the Board of Trustees 
are : Robert S. Brookings, Chairman ; 
Leo S. Eowe, Vice-Chairman ; Frederic A. 
Delano, Treasurer. 

Primary responsibility for formulating 
general policies and co-ordinating the ac- 
tivities of the various divisions of the in- 
stitution is vested in a president. Dr. 
Harold G. Moulton, Director of the Insti- 
tute of Economics and chairman of the 
Problems and Policy Committee of the 
Social Science Research Council, has been 
elected to this office. 

Housing Facilities 

For an institution of this unique type, 
the location and character of housing ac- 
commodations are of more than ordinary 
importance. Financial provision, in the 
form of a memorial gift, has already been 
made for an adequate and attractive home 
for the institution. Plans have been 
nearly matured for a group of buildings of 
an exceptionally attractive as well as utili- 
tarian character. The buildings as pro- 
jected provide for individual offices, sta- 
tistical, conference, and seminar rooms, 
an assembly hall, and an attractive and 
commodious library. Provision is also 
made for living accommodations and rec- 
reational and club facilities. 


By Charles Ratnsdell Lingley 

He speaks not well who doth his time deplore, 
Naming it new and little and obscure. 
Ignoble and unfit for lofty deeds. 
All times were modern in the times of them. 
And this no more than others. 

Do thy part 
Here in the living day, as did the great 
Who made old days immortal ! 

— From "Since the Civil War." 





The Judicial Settlement of Disputes between the States of the United States 
In their Relation to International Law 

Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia 

THERE has been some conjecture as 
to the value of an international court 
of justice for clarifying the rules of inter- 
national law and for the practical work 
of rendering impartial justice between 
nations. The purpose of this paper is to 
call attention to some of the things that 
may be expected of such an international 
tribunal from the experience of the United 
States Supreme Court as the court of jus- 
tice for the States of the United States. 

Certain Implications 

The United States of America, as a 
nation, consists of a Union of many 
States, each having a certain degree of 
autonomy and independence in local mat- 
ters, but with a central Federal Govern- 
ment, to which all the sovereign rights 
and powers of nationality are assigned. 
The relations between these States are, for 
the most part, governed by the Constitu- 
tion; but in many cases concerning boun- 
daries, rights, and relations that instru- 
ment is silent or ambiguous. In answer- 
ing questions that have arisen in such 
disputes as are submitted to it, the United 
States Supreme Court, the common tribu- 
nal for the States, has turned freely to the 
principles of international law, and in a 
number of cases has discussed and decided 
questions according to the law of nations. 

The Federal Government of the United 
States is alone a complete international 
person; but the member States of the 
Union, being for the purposes of their in- 
ternal government separate sovereignties, 
independent of one another, may be said to 
enjoy a degree of international personality. 
These States are not nations, either among 
themselves or toward foreign nations; 
but, in the controversies that arise be- 
tween them, these States take on the char- 
acter, to a certain degree, of independent 
nations, and in the settlement of disputes 
between them the Supreme Court, their 
common tribunal under the Constitution, 
gives due regard to the characteristics of 

statehood that each State possesses. And 
in no other instance is the distinct, quasi- 
international character of the States more 
clearly seen than in the history of the judi- 
cial settlement of controversies between 
these States, from the time they were yet 
the original colonies up to the present. 

When the original States were still 
colonies they enjoyed complete independ- 
ence of one another; they were distinct 
entities and looked only to England as 
their sovereign. Disputes that arose be- 
tween them were referred to the courts of 
England. A dispute between the colonies 
of Rhode Island and Connecticut over 
their mutual boundary was submitted to 
the Privy Council in 1727, and in 1746 
a boundary dispute between Rhode Island 
and Massachusetts was submitted to the 
same body. A dispute between the heirs 
of Lord Penn and Lord Baltimore over 
mutual boundaries was heard in Chancery 
in 1745 and 1750. (See 12 Pet., 657, 

Under the Declaration of Independence, 
1776, the colonies asserted that they had 
assumed the position of nations in the 
society of nations, like other independent 
States, with the power in each to "declare 
war, make peace, contract alliances, and 
of consequence to settle their controversies 
with a foreign power or among themselves, 
which no State or power could do for 
them." But there was no longer any com- 
mon tribunal to which the States might 
resort in the settlement of their contro- 
versies, and interstate friction, mutual re- 
criminations and reprisals in boundary 
disputes were a continual source of serious 

Under the Articles of Confederation 
there were eight interstate disputes. New 
Hampshire and New York each claimed 
the territory now comprising the State of 
Vermont. A dispute between Rhode Is- 
land and Massachusetts was not settled 
until after the adoption of the Constitu- 
tion. Connecticut claimed part of Penn- 




sylvania and New York, and although she 
submitted to a decree of commissioners 
under the Ninth Article of Confederation, 
maintained her right to certain soil until 
1800. New Jersey disputed her boundary 
with Delaware and was in a dispute with 
New York over other matters. Maryland 
and Virginia were in a dispute over their 
boundary line. Disputes between Vir- 
ginia and North Carolina and between 
South Carolina and Georgia were settled 
by mutual agreement. 

A tribunal established under the Ninth 
Article of Confederation to settle such 
controversies was merely temporary, 
though there was an appeal to Congress; 
but the general weakness of the central 
government and the lack of confidence by 
the States made such a system of inter- 
state justice unavailing. 

Edmund Randolph, before the Virginia 
Constitutional Convention, said as to in- 
terstate controversies: "There have been 
disputes respecting boundaries ... re- 
prisals have been made by Pennsylvania 
and Virginia on one another. ... It 
is with respect to the rights of territory 
that the State judiciaries are not compe- 
tent. If the claimants have a right to 
the territories, it is the duty of a good 
government to provide means to put them 
in possession of them." 

Then came the Constitution and the 
establishment of the Supreme Court as 
the arbiter between the States, a tribunal 
of last resort, with original jurisdiction 
over the disputes between two or more 
States of the Union. 

For more than a century the States of 
the United States have availed themselves 
of the opportunity provided in the Con- 
stitution for the settlement of their dis- 
putes by judicial means. They were not 
allowed the process of diplomatic settle- 
ment, and the thought of war was abhor- 
rent to the most contentious; so a third 
method, that of litigation before a com- 
petent court, was left invitingly open. It 
was for this specific purpose that the origi- 
nal jurisdiction of the Supreme Court was 
extended to ". . . . controversies be- 
tween two or more States. . . ." 

The States by their union did not lose 
their separate and independent autonomy, 
and the maintenance of their governments 
and the preservation of their remaining 

quasi-sovereign interests are as much 
within the care of the Constitution as the 
preservation of the Union and the Na- 
tional Government. The Supreme Court, 
in Texas vs. White (7 WaU., 700, 725), 
held that "the Constitution, in all its pro- 
visions, looks to an indestructible Union 
composed of indestructible States." No 
State may legislate for another, nor im- 
pose its authority or decrees upon another. 
But conflicting claims of States may al- 
ways be referred for settlement to the Su- 
preme Court, whose jurisdiction, said 
Justice Story, "extends to controversies 
between two or more States, in order to 
furnish a peaceful and impartial tribunal 
to decide cases where these States claim 
conflicting rights, in order to prevent gross 
irritations and border warfare."* (Story 
on the Constitution (1840), xxxi.) 

The actual decisions of interstate litiga- 
tion have covered questions concerning the 
characteristics of statehood in interna- 
tional law, the extent of territorial juris- 
diction, the determination of boundaries, 
control over territorial waters, and rights 
in interstate streams. In several cases 
the Supreme Court has had to consider 
the responsibility of States in the matter 
of their debts. 

International law is a system of rules 
of conduct generally accepted as a reason- 
able guide to the rights and duties of na- 
tions; deduced by reason, as a consonant 
to justice, from the nature of the society 
existing among independent nations ; with 
such definitions and modifications as may 
be established by the general consent of 
nations. It is a law in equity. There 
being no superior sovereign to dictate what 
the law shall be, international law has 
been evolved from abstn\ct reasoning, cus- 
toms and usages, and the conclusions of 
publicists, based on consent and admitted 
practices, and, finally, from judicial de- 

* The distinct quasi-international character 
of the States has led to many cases not 
strictly of States against States which never- 
theless involve the peculiar status and rela- 
tions of the several States of the United 
States and so have raised many questions of 
international law. These cases cannot be in- 
cluded, however, within the limits set by the 
title of this thesis. (See Keith vs. Clerk, 
on the continuity of States, 97 U. S., 454, and 
Coleman vs. Clark, 97 U. S., 509, on military 
occupation; The Collector vs. Day, 11 Wall., 
113, on power to tax, and others.) 




cisions which involve questions of inter- 
national law and relations. 

The value of judicial decisions lies in 
the reasoning of the judges and the au- 
thorities collected; and, moreover, judi- 
cial decisions tend to render certain and 
stable the loose general principles of in- 
ternational law, and to show their applica- 
tion and how they are understood in the 
countries where the tribunals are sitting. 
The consideration of the methods of judi- 
cial approach in the determination of in- 
terstate disputes within our American 
Union is of some importance, therefore, 
to the whole problem of international judi- 
cial settlement. This will readily appear 
from even a cursory study of a few of the 

Illustrative Cases 

In the case of the Cherokee Nation vs. 
Georgia (5 Pet., 1) the characteristics of 
nationality are considered in determining 
that an Indian tribe or "nation" is not a 
nation qualified as a member of the family 
of nations. 

It was there held that a true State in 
international law is a distinct political 
entity, capable of managing its own af- 
fairs and interests and governing itself by 
its own authority and laws, sovereign and 
independent of any outside power, respon- 
sible in its political character for its for- 
eign engagements, and capable of main- 
taining the relations of war and peace. 
It is formed of a body of men united for 
their mutual protection and advantage; it 
takes resolutions in common, as an artifi- 
cial person; it has an understanding and 
will peculiar to itself; it is capable of 
entering into contracts and of assuming 
obligations; and it may possess property 
apart from the private property of its 
individual members. 

The position of the States of the United 
States is that of constituent parts of the 
United States, their status as independent 
nations in the family of nations having 
been surrendered to the Federal Govern- 
ment. (New Hampshire vs. New York, 
108 U. S., 76, 90.) 

The greater number of the disputes be- 
tween States settled in the Supreme Court 
have concerned the establishment of boun- 
dary lines. These cases are very impor- 
tant, for thy involve private and public 
title, jurisdiction, and sovereignty. 

The territorial property of a State con- 
sists of all area, land and water, included 
within certain boundaries, over which a 
State exercises complete jurisdiction. 
These territorial limits are ascertained by 
treaty or prescription, together with such 
land as may be added by accretion; and 
when the territory abuts upon the sea, the 
right of jurisdiction extends over a certain 
margin of the water. 

The exercise of territorial jurisdiction, 
therefore, is limited to a State by the ex- 
tent of its boundaries, and because of this 
it becomes very necessary at times to de- 
termine with great exactness the line of 
demarcation between neighboring States. 

Boundary lines may be classed as artifi- 
cial and natural. Artificial lines are 
those traced by certain astronomical lines, 
parallels of latitude or meridians of longi- 
tude, or they may be straight lines be- 
tween two points. Natural lines are those 
traced in such natural barriers as rivers, 
streams, and lakes, the sea, and coastal 

When an artificial line has been estab- 
lished and run out and acquiesced in for 
a long time, it is conclusive, even if it 
happens to vary somewhat from the courses 
given in the original grant. (Virginia vs. 
Tennessee, 148 U. S., 503, 522.) 

Said the Supreme Court in New Mex- 
ico vs. Texas (1927), 48 S. Ct., 126, 134, 
"It is well settled that governments, as 
well as private persons, are bound by the 
practical line that has been recognized and 
adopted as their boudnary.''' 

Long acquiescence in the possession of 
territory and the undisputed exercise of 
dominion and sovereignty over it is con- 
clusive of a State's title and rightful au- 
thority. This doctrine of prescription, 
fostered by Vattel, is adopted by the 
United States Supreme Court. (Virginia 
vs. Tennessee, supra, 523 ; Khode Island 
vs. Massachusetts, 4 Howard, 591, 639.) 

Boundary lines may be designated in 
treaties. When so done, the entire in- 
strument must be examined in case of a 
dispute as to the meaning and the real 
intentions of the parties; and maps men- 
tioned in the treaty are to be considered 
as a part of the treaty. But a map im- 
perfectly made may be considered only as 
a general guide where a more perfect sur- 
vey is provided for, and will not stand 




where an astronomical line is provided for 
in the treaty. (United States vs. Texas, 
162 U. S., 1; Missouri vs. Kentucky, 11 
Wall., 395, 410.) 

Where a navigable river constitutes the 
boundary between two States, the interests 
of those States including, as it does, an 
equitable control of the navigation of the 
stream, the boundary line extends to the 
center of the main navigable channel. 
This doctrine is known as "thalweg." 
(Iowa vs. Illinois, 147 U. S., 1, 13; Louis- 
iana vs. Mississippi, 202 U. S., 1, 49.) 
Where there are several channels, the main 
channel is that one habitually followed 
by vessels of the largest tonnage. (Min- 
nesota vs. Wisconsin, 252 TJ. S., 273.) 
But where the States have agreed as to 
which of the channels shall govern the 
boundary line, that must stand. (Wash- 
ington vs. Oregon, 211 U. S., 127, 135.) 

Gradual changes in the channel, due to 
erosion and accretion, carry the boundary 
line with it. Erosion and accretion occur 
together, the bits of dirt being taken from 
one side of the stream and deposited on 
the other — a gradual and almost imper- 
ceptible change. But if the stream sud- 
denly and violently abandons its old chan- 
nel and finds a new one, the boundary re- 
mains in the old channel, though water 
may cease to flow therein. (Arkansas vs. 
Tennessee, 246 U. S., 158, 175; Nebraska 
vs. Iowa, 143 U. S., 359 ; Arkansas vs. 
Mississippi, 250 U. S., 39.) 

When a boundary river remains, by vir- 
tue of treaty or otherwise, within one 
State, that State's jurisdiction extends to 
the entire bed of the stream, which is de- 
fined as that portion of the soil "... 
adequate to contain it (the river) at its 
average and mean state during the entire 
year ..." without reference to extra- 
ordinary freshets or extreme droughts. 
(Alabama vs. Georgia, 23 How., 505, 513- 

The usual line of demarcation as to non- 
navigable streams that form boundaries is 
a medial line between the banks of the 
stream. (Alabama vs. Georgia, supra, p. 
513.) And that applies also to shallow 
boundary lakes. (Minnesota vs. Wiscon- 
sin, 252 U. S., 273.) 

As to navigable boundary lakes and 
landlocked seas, where there is no par- 

ticular track of navigation, the line of 
demarcation is drawn in the middle; and 
this is true of narrow straits separating 
the lands of two States; but where there 
is a deep water channel for sailing, the 
rule of thalweg applies. (Louisiana vs. 
Mississippi, 202 U. S., 1, 50.) 

And with respect to such water boun- 
daries as sounds, bays, gulfs, estuaries, 
straits, and other arms of the sea, where 
these are navigable, the rule of thalweg ap- 
plies. (Louisiana vs. Mississippi, supra.) 

Similarly with respect to fishing rights, 
islands located in the boundary waters, 
and bridges, the rules that govern the de- 
marcation of the boundary line in that 
particular body of water apply. (Louis- 
iana vs. Mississippi, supra, as to fishing 
rights; Indiana vs. Kentucky, 136 U. S., 
479-507-512, as to islands; Georgia vs. 
South Carolina, 257 U. S., 519; Iowa vs. 
Illinois, 147 U. S., 1, 11, as to bridges.) 

A number of cases involving the right 
to divert waters of an interstate stream 
have come before the Supreme Court in 
interstate disputes. The decisions have 
been aimed at maintaining an equality of 
use by the States of such interstate 
streams; and therefore, in Kansas vs. 
Colorado, 206 U. S., 46, Colorado was 
not restrained from using the waters of 
the Arkansas for irrigation, because it was 
found that the watershed being toward 
Kansas, the waters so diverted percolated 
through the soil, and thus Kansas received 
as much benefit as if the water was left in 
the stream. The decision was without 
prejudice to another suit by Kansas if in 
the future Kansas found that she was 
being injured by the diversion of the 

But in the case of Wyoming vs. Colo- 
rado, 259 U. S., 419, where it was found 
that the watershed was away from the 
complaining State, that State did suffer 
from the diversion of water and an in- 
junction was permitted. The principle 
of equitable division of the water is an 
elastic one and is based on the public 
needs of each State. 

Where a State is divided into several 
States the public debt of the former State 
may be apportioned. (Virginia vs. West 
Virginia, 220 U. S., 1.) 




Principles of International Practice and the 
World Court 

Said Elihu Root at the laying of the 
cornerstone of the Pan American Build- 
ing at Washington, May 11, 1918 : "There 
are no international controversies so seri- 
ous that they cannot be settled peaceably 
if both parties really desire peaceful settle- 
ment, while there are few causes so trivial 
that they cannot be made the occasion for 
war. The matters in dispute between 
nations are nothing ; the spirit which deals 
with them is everything." 

At the present time the idea of an In- 
ternational Court of Justice has taken the 
form of reality. The elimination of the 
causes of conflict between nations has 
gradually evolved through diplomatic ad- 
justment and arbitration to the establish- 
ment of an impartial and competent tribu- 
nal for the settlement of international dis- 
putes, the Permanent Court of Interna- 
tional Justice at The Hague; and in the 
study of the problems that might con- 
front that court, and in regard to juris- 
diction, practice, and procedure, the 
student of international affairs might well 
turn to that prototype of an international 
court, the Supreme Court of the United 
States, in its peculiar position as a court 
of justice for the States of the United 
States, to see what has been the experience 
of that court in the handling of its quasi- 
sovereign litigants. 

Before any court can entertain a case, 
it must ask itself whether or not it has 
jurisdiction over the cause. The question 
of jurisdiction is not waived either by 
silence of counsel or their consent; the 
court must be possessed of jurisdiction 
either by law or by the instrument which 
created it. 

Sovereign nations cannot be sued in any 
court unless they have consented to such 
suit, or may be presumed to have con- 
sented to such suit. Thus, by accepting 
the Constitution, the States of the United 
States have been presumed to have con- 
sented to suit by a sister State, according 
to the terms of that pact, without further 
signifying consent. (Ehode Island vs. 
Massachusetts, 12 Pet., 657, 720; Kansas 
vs. Colorado, 206 U. S., 46, 83.) And so, 
also, the Permanent Court must consider 
whether the parties, sovereign States, have 
consented, expressly or tacitly, to its 

jurisdiction. And that court held, in its 
fifth advisory opinion, relating to the 
Eastern Carilian affair, that, as Eussia had 
never consented to any submission of the 
dispute, it had no jurisdiction. "The 
court, being a court of justice, cannot, 
even in giving advisory opinions, depart 
from the essential rules guiding their 
activity as a court." (See Congressional 
Digest, December 17, 1925, pp. 602, 603.) 

States alone may be the parties before 
an international court. Before the Su- 
preme Court, the case must be between the 
States as such, and not by a State in be- 
half of its citizens or individuals (New 
Hampshire vs. Louisiana, 108 U. S., 76, 
81, 91), although if an individual cedes 
his interests to the State, then the State 
may sue in its own name. (South Da- 
kota vs. North Carolina, 192 U. S., 286.) 

Before the Permanent Court the State 
must espouse the cause, frame the issues, 
and conduct the litigation. Judgment is 
for or against a State; and when for a 
nation, that nation in its sovereign capac- 
ity may dispose of the proceeds of the 
judgment as it sees fit. 

The next question is whether the court 
has jurisdiction over the subject-matter 
of the suit. The greatest objection to 
rendering a judicial decision in a matter 
in dispute between two nations is that the 
dispute is political and not judicial, and 
that a judgment may directly affect the 
safety of the State. (Vattel, Law of Na- 
tions (1760), I, 244.) 

At first glance, all disputes in which 
States are parties are more or less politi- 
cal, because they affect the sovereignty of 
the State; but, as pointed out by Justice 
Baldwin in Rhode Island vs. Massachu- 
setts, 12 Pet., 657, 736-8, such questions 
are political which a State reserved to itself 
for settlement through diplomatic chan- 
nels, and such questions are judicial which 
a State in its sovereign capacity is willing 
to submit to a court of justice to be de- 
cided by the proper rules of jurisprudence 
and recognized rules of international law. 

The Permanent Court of International 
Justice, in its establishing protocol, is 
given jurisdiction over such cases as fail 
of diplomatic adjustment (Art. 33), with 
the power to hear causes of a "legal na- 
ture" concerning, "(a) The interpreta- 
tion of a treaty; (&) Any question of In- 




ternational law; (c) The existence of any 
fact which, if established, would con- 
stitute a breach of international obliga- 
tion; {d) The nature or extent of repara- 
tion to be made for a breach of an inter- 
national obligation; (e) The interpreta- 
tion of a sentence passed by the court" 
(Article 34). 

Having jurisdiction over the parties, the 
United States Supreme Court may proceed 
ex parte if the respondent State refuses to 
appear in a case brought by a sister State, 
though with exceeding caution, recogniz- 
ing the character of the parties (Rhode 
Island vs. Massachusetts, supra, 755, 761 ; 
New Jersey vs. New York, 5 Pet., 284; 
3 Pet, 46i; 6 Pet., 323); and the Per- 
manent Court of International Justice is 
empowered to do likewise, if it has juris- 
diction of the parties, when satisfied "that 
the claim is supported by substantial evi- 
dence and well founded in fact and in 
law" (Art. 52). 

Because of the character of the parties 
and the nature of the suits, the Supreme 
Court has held that ordinary principles 
of private litigation should be so modified 
that neither State should be embarrassed 
by technicalities nor be hurried in their 
part to the suit. (Massachusetts vs. 
Ehode Island, 14 Pet., 210, 257; Virginia 
vs. West Virginia, 220 U. S., 1, 27 ; 222 
U. S., 17, 19; 234 U. S., 117, 121.) 

It is often the case that settlement of a 
dispute will affect not only the parties in 
question, but also other nations as well. 
Hence these other nations should be al- 
lowed to appear and bring in evidence, 
and under such appearance be bound by 
the judgment of the court. This is the 
practice before the Supreme Court of the 
United States (Oklahoma vs. Texas, 252 
U. S., 372; Florida vs. Georgia, 17 How., 
478, 491) and before the Permanent 
Court as well (Art. 60, 61 ; The Wimble- 
don case, involving the Kiel Canal, de- 

cided by the Permanent Court of Inter- 
national Justice (The Hague, 1923.) 
Where there is no cause for intervention, 
such has been denied. (Kansas vs. Colo- 
rado, 206 U. S., 46, 85-92.) 

Article 62 of the protocol establishing 
the Permanent Court provides that "im- 
less otherwise directed by the court, each 
party shall bear its own costs." In a re- 
cent case before the United States Su- 
preme Court (North Dakota vs. Minne- 
sota (1924), 263 U. S., 583), it was held 
that where the settlement was beneficial 
to both parties, as in the case of a settle- 
ment of a disputed boundary, each party 
should bear an equal share of the costs, 
while in a case of a purely litigious char- 
acter, if the suit has failed, the com- 
plainant must bear the costs; but if the 
suit succeeds, the defendant must bear the 

It must be realized, also, that the court 
can only handle the controversy in hand; 
that it cannot investigate the motives of a 
State legislature in its acts, nor the chief 
magistrate of the State in enforcing the 
laws of a State in his own discretion ; and 
it is against public policy to impute to 
an authorized official any other than legiti- 
mate motives. (Louisiana vs. Texas, 176 
U. S., 1, 18.) 

It cannot be hoped that an international 
court will render perfect decisions, nor 
that the parties will always be ready in 
accepting the decrees of the court; but 
every decision that is acknowledged to be 
just and every instance of ready com- 
pliance with the decisions of the court wiU 
make the way more possible for the estab- 
lishment of the rule of justice in inter- 
national affairs. The real value of good 
courts, said James Brown Scott, "is that 
they develop the habit of peaceful settle- 
ment at the expense of the habit of fight- 



Assistant Secretary of State 

NO QUESTION" is more vitally impor- 
tant to the world than that of peace. 
For this reason it is always worthy of 
discussion, but because it is so vital the 
discussion should be carried on with due 
regard to historical facts, with a frank 
recognition of the weakness of human na- 
ture, as well as its idealism. In other 
words, I believe that when the pursuit 
of peace becomes a fad, the cause of peace 
is injured. There are many altogether 
good and otherwise intelligent men and 
women who believe that when once an 
ideal has been written into law or into 
a treaty it becomes an inviolable prin- 
ciple. There are many, for example, who 
believe that if the United States signed 
agreements with other nations to outlaw 
war, or treaties guaranteeing that under 
no possible circumstances should we go to 
war, there would inevitably be no war; 
but this is to ignore realities, to ignore 
human weakness, to miss the fact that 
nations are not sublime moral entities, 
but, rather, groups of fallible and passion- 
ate human beings. As Mr. Hoover once 
admirably expressed the idea, "National 
character is the sum of the moral fiber of 
individuals." A nation is morally great 
exactly in proportion to the moral sound- 
ness of its inhabitants, and the most suc- 
cessful worker for peace is he who up- 
builds and strengthens the moral fiber of 
individuals. This is a long process and 
there are many who believe that some- 
where we can find a short cut. 

There is another thingi to remember. 
Peace, to be real, must be a state of mind. 
Mere absence of war does not necessarily 
mean peace any more than the passing 
of night means sunshine when the sky is 
heavy with clouds. There is no real peace 
when nations are angrily suspicious of 
each other, glaring at each other across 
national boundaries. The aspiration of 
the American Government is for that real 
peace which comes of international un- 

• From a recent address. 

derstanding. But this permanent peace 
cannot be achieved by waving a magician's 
wand. It is the result of the growth of 
character and of understanding, of the 
gradual elimination of the causes of inter- 
national misunderstanding, of willingness 
to let others live their own lives as they 
see fit, so long as their choice does not 
interfere with the happiness of the rest 
of the world ; of a consistent and unselfish 
support of national rights. 

A nation which is unwilling to defend 
its own rights does not help on the cause 
of peace. During the World War Swit- 
zerland and Holland, for example, were 
kept out of the maelstrom because all the 
combatants knew they were ready to de- 
fend their frontiers. These small nations 
had no belligerent tendencies, neither did 
they propose to be trampled on; and be- 
cause of this the tides of war broke harm- 
lessly against their borders. 

Every fair-minded person knows that 
the United States has not the smallest 
desire to go to war with anyone. And, 
beyond this negative statement, every 
fair-minded person knows also that the 
United States is determined to maintain 
an honorable peace with all the world. 
The Department of State exists largely 
for the purpose of maintaining this hon- 
orable peace, and our efforts along this 
line cannot be measured by proposals for 
arbitration treaties or for pacts to prevent 

It is well known that wars have some- 
times begim through trivial, apparently 
unimportant, causes. It is the business of 
diplomacy so to handle these matters that 
the United States may be respected for 
the just exercise of its power. We must, 
for example, support an American citizen 
living abroad when he has obeyed the law ; 
but we cannot, because we are powerful, 
support him in wrong doing. We must 
be generous; but we must not permit 




generosity to bear the badge of weakness. 
In drawing treaties of commerce, we must 
not demand from others what we are un- 
willing to give ourselves ; but, on the other 
hand, we must not hasten to give to others 
what they are unwilling to give us. 

The Department is trying continually 
to break down unnecessary barriers to 
commerce, to simplify commercial prac- 
tice, because all this makes misunder- 
standing less likely. It was in this same 
pursuit of peace that John Hay stood for 
the policy of the open door, and that Mr. 
Kellogg stands solidly on the principle 
of general most-favored-nation treatment. 
We are always willing to extend to every 
nation the treatment we extend to any one 
nation, on condition, of course, that it 
does the same for us. We ask no special 
favors of anyone and give no special fa- 
vors. We demand that others shall not 
discriminate against us so long as we do 
not discriminate against them. 

The Department of State believes firmly 
in the principle of arbitration for the 
settlement of international disputes of a 
judicial character, which cannot be settled 
by diplomacy in their initial stages. We 
prefer to handle such disputes in such 
manner that the necessity of arbitration 
shall not arise. We believe that others 
have good will, as we know that we our- 
selves have good will. We believe that 
in most cases of misunderstanding two 
men of different nationalities can sit 
down quietly and settle almost any dis- 
pute that has arisen between their two 
countries; and, therefore, we think that 
even in non-justiciable matters recourse 
should be had to conciliation. 

Recently, in the matter of the claims 
with Great Britain arising out of the late 
war, we believed that a settlement could 
be made by frank joint discussion, and 
that it has been made shows the progress 
of the last few years. I remember say- 
ing to an older and much more experi- 
enced man soon after the war, "Why don't 
we get to work and settle these British 
claims?" I felt very new and inexperi- 
enced in the game of diplomacy when he 
answered, "Absurd. Don't you know that 
the claims of the War of 1812 were only 
settled a few years ago?" It took 100 
years for Great Britain and the United 

States to settle the claims of 1812, and 
six months, when we really began to dis- 
cuss the matter, to settle the claims of 
the recent war. All that is the kind of 
thing that makes for peace. 

I said that we want to make commercial 
treaties alike with all nations. Equally, 
when we make treaties of arbitration or 
other treaties drawn with the direct pur- 
pose of preserving world peace, we want 
to make them alike with all. Let me give 
you one example of what I mean. It is 
an example typical of the attitude of the 
American Government, and at the same 
time it shows that the government must 
act calmly, must not be stampeded into 
ill-considered action. All the world knew 
that M. Briand last summer suggested to 
this government a pact by which France 
and the United States would agree never 
to go to war with each other. The French 
note was received at a time when, as it 
happened, neither Ambassador, French 
nor American, was at his post. The 
Secretary of State said that he would dis- 
cuss the matter whenever the French were 
prepared to do so; but, obviously, it was 
not urgent, as war between the two coun- 
tries was, in any case, unthinkable. Im- 
mediately, however, the agitators became 
vocal. Professional peacemakers did not 
want us to think, to consider the matter 
in all its angles, but to act instantly. It 
is not very long since one of them tele- 
phoned me about it. He was so eagerly 
in favor of peace that he was positively 
belligerent. "It is an outrage," he said, 
"that our government should hang back 
in a matter of this kind. I am going to 
make speeches about it and I warn you 
that I shall attack the Department of 
State as it deserves. I am absolutely in 
favor of the Briand Treaty. Will you 
tell me what is in it?" 

Parenthetically I might say that I wish 
you could realize how muich agitation 
there is for things which are not under- 
stood even in the most elementary way. 
It is agitation, to be sure, based on gen- 
erous and humanitarian aspirations; but 
it is too often combined with muddled 
thinking. Let me assure you that there 
is far more danger in peace pacts based 
on muddled thinking than there is in re- 
fusing to sign new pacts at all. 




In this French matter, the Department 
of State took the stand that it was in 
favor of any agreement which, in stating 
unequivocally a moral principle, would 
diminish the danger of international con- 
flict, but that to sign an agreement with 
one nation which we were not ready to 
sign with others was not a step toward 
general peace. We felt that an agreement 
that under no circumstances would we at- 
tack France might cause irritation and 
unrest in other nations. It would almost 
inevitably have been looked upon by them 
as something closely approaching a de- 
fensive alliance. The Secretary therefore 
proposed a new treaty of arbitration with 
France to replace that which expires by 
limitation in February, and at the same 
time wrote a note on the Briand proposal 
which you have all seen in the press. In 
this note we welcomed the French idea of 
making a declaration that we should no 
longer consider resort to war in the settle- 
ment of international disputes as a na- 
tional policy; but we said that this agree- 
ment must, in order to be useful in the 
preservation of peace, be drawn up in the 
form of a multilateral treaty, to be signed 
by the principal nations of the world. It 
remains to be seen whether this idea can 
be carried out. Such matters, whatever 
the extremists may think, cannot be for- 
mulated without the most careful thought 
and analysis; but even if nothing comes 
of this particular discussion, the world 
wiU be no worse off. I think it would 
have been had we followed the advice of 
the professional peacemakers and hastened 
to sign a bilateral pact with France. 

"If the multilateral pact should be 
signed," you may ask me, "why will the 
world be any better off, since you said 
yourself that human nature was still fal- 
lible, and that no treaty will inevitably 
prevent war?" The answer is that open 
and public acceptance of an idea makes a 
nation, as well as an individual, think 
seriously before publicly repudiating th9 
idea. It is no absolute guarantee of 
peace; that comes certainly only with the 
development of the moral worth of the 
citizens who make up a nation. It is, on 
the other hand, a strong moral deterrent, 
and it is fair to say that the longer a 
nation holds back from war, the greater 
is the chance of peace. 

Arbitration treaties with several nations 
are expiring shortly. The department 
plans to renew them all and to make them, 
if possible, more comprehensive. An ar- 
bitration decision is a judicial settlement, 
which must be followed like any court 
decision ; and it is, therefore, important 
to define clearly and specifically the ques- 
tions which are not subject to arbitration, 
not to leave that decision to the more or 
less arbitrary decision of one or the other 
nation. All the remaining questions still 
open to conciliation must be referred 
under the Bryan treaties to conciliation; 
and I believe that the delay thus necessi- 
tated will go a long way to prevent war. 

You know of the consistent co-operation 
of the American Government with the 
League of Nations in the work of the 
Preparatory Commission on Disarma- 
ment. You know of the meeting on naval 
limitation called by the President. Even 
if this conference reached no conclusion, 
it pointed the way to later achievement 
and certainly did not interfere with the 
good understanding between the partici- 
pating nations. 

You know of the good will and the 
patience of the American Government in 
its dealings with Mexico, its steady resist- 
ance to the urging of those Americans who 
wanted to break relations forthwith; and 
the result of that is that many of the com- 
plaints bid fair to be settled; that our 
relations with Mexico are better than they 
have been for a long time. 

The work of the Department of State 
is always to bring about better under- 
standing, to appreciate the point of view 
of other nations, without once losing our 
own American point of view. It is not 
dramatic. It means watchfulness and 
good humor and friendliness. It epito- 
mizes the lives of those of us who are 
in the work, and it is an inspiring work 
because, whether or not its results are 
recognized, they are very real. 

All this is logic, the daily grind, if 
you will, of diplomatic action. It all 
makes for peace, enduring peace; but I 
should be telling only half the story if 
I omitted altogether the matter of senti- 
ment. Sometimes an accident does more 
to stir up the generous feelings of respect 
and affection between nations than years 
of honest endeavor. When Lindbergh 




landed in Paris there was an outburst of 
enthusiasm for the United States that 
made people forget for a moment the 
debts and all other matters of dispute. 
Through Lindbergh the French and later 
the Mexicans felt the real spirit of Amer- 
ica, and the propaganda of the agitators, 
which like a veil of smoke keeps others 
from seeing us as we are, was blown away. 
It was real sentiment, real enthusiasm for 
an ideal. Exactly the same feelings were 
aroused in America through the reception 
that Lindbergh received; and so, for a 
time, the hearts of both nations beat in 
unison. Every time this happens we move 
a step nearer peace. The same generous 

sentiments are today, I hope, in the minds 
of the Cubans and our other Latin Amer- 
ican friends, as they welcome the Presi- 
dent of the United States in Havana. 

It is the duty of the Department of 
State, then, to clear up misunderstand- 
ings, big and little; to recognize and sup- 
port friendly enthusiasm wherever we see 
it; to criticize only when we must and to 
praise whenever we can; to support the 
rights of America everywhere, and to see 
to it that rights are never in conflict with 
the right. It is an inspiring work, and 
it becomes always more inspiring when 
we know that we have the American peo- 
ple back of us. 




Mr. Penfield, a lawyer with a wide inter- 
national practice, has served in our Depart- 
ment of State and represented our country in 
cases before the Permanent Court of Arbitra- 
tion at the Hague. — Editor. 

THE only thing permanent in life is 
change. It is constantly about us in 
the material world. As it goes on, our 
American foreign policy must necessarily 
vary in some particulars to meet the new 
international situations that may confront 
us ; and yet there are certain phases of our 
foreign policy which are a permanent part 
of us — policies which in the lapse of years 
since their adoption have proved their 
worth and afforded us protection in time 
of stress. It would be ideal if we could 
adopt formulae by which our foreign policy 
in all respects could be permanently de- 
fined. But, until human nature changes 
and the millennium arrives, that would 
appear to be impracticable. 

The Conduct of Our Foreign Relations 

Both before and subsequent to our in- 
dependence, we had our contacts and re- 
lations with foreign countries. These 
necessitated the inception and mainte- 
nance of a foreign policy. Under our 
Constitution and laws the President, act- 
ing through his Secretary of State, is 
charged with the conduct of foreign af- 
fairs. The latter acts through his foreign 

service officers, to whom he sends instruc- 
tions and from whom he receives reports, 
and is assisted by departmental oflicials, 
most of whom have served in the country 
or particular group of countries where 
there may arise a new question requiring 
the determination by the Executive as to 
what our policy should be. 

When such a question arises the Presi- 
dent reaches his decision only after con- 
ferences with his experts and study of 
his documents. The question may find its 
way to the Committees of Foreign Affairs 
of the Senate and House. It may be de- 
bated in Congress. It may be published 
in the newspapers, written about in the 
magazines, discussed in organizations 
such as the American Peace Society, 
argued by men in their daily work, and 
talked over by women in their homes. 
From all these sources our American 
foreign policy is finally formulated. 

Is it not, then, rather difficult for us to 
say whether the policy thus formed is or 
is not constructive? We may have heard 
the debates of Congress, read the news- 
papers and magazines, and been present 
at discussions of various kinds ; but unless 
we have studied the confidential communi- 
cations from our diplomatic and consular 
officers abroad and availed ourselves of the 
information possessed by our experts in 
the Department of State, we are not fully 
qualified to say what our foreign policy 




should be with reference to a particular 
question. For these reasons when ques- 
tions — sometimes somewhat prolonged — 
arise between our government and that of 
a foreign country, we should not hastily 
criticize the policy of our President and 
Secretary of State. 

Any conclusion as to whether we have a 
constructive policy is a matter of indi- 
vidual judgment. A passive policy may 
be constructive. In diplomacy it is often 
better to know what not to do than to 
know what to do. To do nothing, to fol- 
low a passive policy, may in the long run 
be a constructive policy. 

Our Past Policies Were Constructive 

In reaching a conclusion as to what a 
constructive American foreign policy 
should be, would it not be well for us to 
consider our past policies ? 

In his farewell address Washington 
cautioned us to observe good faith and 
justice toward all nations and to cultivate 
peace and harmony with all. He advised 
us it would be unwise to implicate our- 
selves in European politics or the combi- 
nations and collisions of her friendships or 
enmities. He inquired why "entangle our 
peace and prosperity in the toils of Euro- 
pean ambition, rivalship, interest, humor, 
or caprice." Thomas Jefferson, in his 
first inaugural address, counseled us to 
maintain "peace, commerce, and honest 
friendship with all nations, entangling 
alliances with none." The doctrine pro- 
mulgated by President Monroe has been 
one of the beacons in our foreign policy. 
His declaration and counsel are as vital 
today for our national protection as they 
were at the time of their pronouncement, 
in 1823. 

The United States has been interested 
in treaties of arbitration. In 1908 it 
made conventions for the arbitration of 
questions of a legal nature, or relating to 
the interpretation of treaties, provided 
they did not affect our vital interest, inde- 
pendence, or honor. 

In 1911 treaties were signed, but not 
ratified, to extend the scope of those of 
1908, so as to exclude the exceptions and 
to provide for the peaceful solution of all 
questions of difference which it shall be 
found impossible to settle by diplomacy. 

They provided for the arbitration of dif- 
ferences that were justiciable in their 
nature, those that were susceptible of de- 
cision by the application of the principles 
of law or equity. 

In 1915 treaties were made for the ad- 
vancement of peace which provided that 
all disputes be submitted for investiga- 
tion and report to a permanent interna- 
tional commission. The parties agreed 
not to resort to any act or force during 
the investigation, the theory being that 
it would give them an opportunity to cool 
off before taking any action. 

The United States has had a construc- 
tive policy with reference to Central 
America. It initiated two conferences of 
those countries, both held in Washington, 
the first in 1907 and the second in 1923, 
x\mong the results were general treaties 
of peace and amity, conventions provid- 
ing those governments would not recog- 
nize any other government which mignt 
come into power in any of the republics 
as a consequence of a revolution against 
the recognized government, and conven- 
tions for the establishment of a Central 
American Court of Justice. 

The United States has also shown a 
constructive policy in regard to all of the 
countries of Latin America by the pro- 
motion of the Pan-American conferences. 
In November, 1881, James G. Blaine, then 
Secretary of State, issued an invitation 
for the first international American con- 
ference "for the purpose of considering 
and discussing the methods of preventing 
war between the nations of America." 
Since then five conferences have been held. 
At the sixth, which will convene in Ha- 
vana next month, twelve projects will be 
presented pertaining to public interna- 
tional law. It is interesting to note that 
none of them will deal with the rules and 
regulations of international war. 

The United States showed a construc- 
tive policy in its participation in The 
Hague conferences of 1899 and 1907. 
The objects of these conferences were to 
secure the benefits of a real and endur- 
ing peace. Their programs included 
limitation of armaments, good offices, 
mediation, and arbitration. 

The United States can well point with 
pride to the Washington and Geneva dis- 
armament conferences and to the part it 




played in providing the membership of 
the Dawes Commission. 

After the war came the Versailles 
Treaty and the discussion concerning the 
League of Nations. Some believed that 
we ought to stay out of the League. 
Others considered that our failure to join 
showed a lack of a constructive policy. 
The League has proven its value to the 
countries of Europe, and the United 
States should do nothing to discourage its 
existence. But the majority of our people 
believe they voted correctly when they de- 
cided the United States should not become 
a party. 

An incident occurring during the last 
session of the League caused some of us 
to conclude that our decision to refrain 
from membership had been wise. It was 
a mere gesture, but, in case we had been 
a member, it had possibilities of proving 
a source of embarrassment. The delegate 
of Panama raised the question as to 
whether, under the treaty between Pan- 
ama and the United States for the con- 
struction of the canal, Panama transferred 
to the United States its right of sover- 
eignty over the Canal Zone or only con- 
ceded to the United States the power and 
authority as though the United States 
were sovereign. He suggested that if the 
Government of the United States did not 
accept the Panaman interpretation there 
then remained the recourse of submitting 
this difference to the decision of a court 
of impartial justice. 

If the United States had been a party 
to the League, it seems probable that the 
gesture of the representative of Panama 
would have gone further, and that we 
might have been required to submit the 
question of our sovereignty over the canal. 
Would there be anything in the nature of 
a constructive foreign policy in joining a 
European League when conceivably it 
might lead to the loss of our rights to 
the Panama Canal? 

We have always favored the establish- 
ment of an International Court of Justice. 
The present World Court is a wing of 
the League of Nations. If we become a 
party to that court, it should be with 
proper reservations; otherwise we should 
continue to decline membership and lend 
our efforts to the establishment of a new 
court, totally divorced from the League. 

Our Present Policies Are Constructive 

Today we have our international prob- 
lems. Some of them are in the countries 
to the south of us. While our effort to 
solve the Tacna-Arica dispute has not yet 
been successful, it was a constructive at- 
tempt to solve a long-pending question 
between two of the principal governments 
of South America. We have a problem 
with Nicaragua, but a reading of the docu- 
ments discloses that President Coolidge 
was correct in upholding the sanctity of 
the Central American Treaty of 1923, 
providing against the recognition of anj 
government that should come into power 
through a revolutionary movement; and a 
study of the constitution and laws of 
Nicaragua make clear that the recognition 
of the Government of Diaz was the only 
policy that the President could properly 

The problem with Mexico involves the 
Constitution of 1917 and legislation en- 
acted subsequent thereto of a confiscatory 
and retroactive nature. It has required 
the greatest amount of patience, but the 
revelations, if correct, of our newspapers 
of the last month demonstrate that there 
is, as has been many times alleged, a con- 
nection between Moscow and Mexico City, 
and that at least prima facie evidence has 
been produced which would tend to in- 
volve the Government of Mexico in the 
promotion of agitation and revolutionary 
disorder in Nicaragua as well as elsewhere. 

The Mexican question is somewhat re- 
lated to that of Eussia. We do not desire 
to interfere in the internal affairs of 
Eussia. We recognize its right to develop 
its own institutions. But when it comes 
to the matter of is recognition, the ques- 
tions that must be answered must be with 
reference to its disposition to discharge 
its international obligations, its assurance 
of the validity of obligations, and its 
guaranty that rights shall not be repudi- 
ated and property confiscated. 

In our relations with China we have 
developed constructive policies — the open 
door, the maintenance of its integrity, 
equality of commercial opportunity, co- 
operation with other powers in the decla- 
ration of common principles, limitation 
of naval armament and of fortifications 
and naval bases. The special customs con- 




ference and the commission on extrater- 
ritoriality were results of a constructive 
policy. But while the unfortunate con- 
flict exists in China and there is lacking 
a responsible government with which to 
deal, our policy must necessarily be held 
in abeyance. The chief problem in China 
is that of internal pacification. 

Our Future Policy With Reference to World 
Peace Is Constructive 

What should our policy be with refer- 
ence to international peace? War is an 
abnormal condition. We should take 
every possible step to prevent its arising. 
Can this be accomplished by bringing 
about an outlawry of war? 

Among the most interesting suggestions 
of this year was Monsieur Briand's pro- 
posal of perpetual peace by nations agree- 
ing to outlaw war. This could have a 
favorable reception if our system of gov- 
ernment would permit it. While authority 
to enter into such a treaty may be a part 
of the treaty-making power, declaring the 
President empowered to make treaties 
with the advice and consent of the Senate, 
this power does not abolish other dele- 
gated powers. 

Under the Constitution the Congress is 
empowered to declare war. This is to be 
distinguished from the treaty-making 
power granted to the President and Sen- 
ate. While the Constitution gives Con- 
gress the right of declaring war, neither it 
nor any other organ of the government 
can abolish that right. At any time that 
it sees fit, Congress may declare war. A 
present Congress cannot prevent a future 
Congress from declaring war whenever it 
may deem it to the national interest to 
do so. 

Notwithstanding, it would appear the 
Senate has the power to make such an 
agreement, and that it would be binding 
'On our government. But in case the Con- 
gress should subsequently desire to declare 
war, it would have the inherent right to 
•do so. In such an event, the law of the 
land would be the declaration of war and 
not the treaty. It is a fundamental prin- 
ciple of law that when there is a conflict 
between the terms of a treaty and a law, 
the one that was made last is the one that 
would be eifective. So if the Congress 
should declare war, it would thereby re- 

peal the treaty so far as domestic law is 
concerned. But with reference to inter- 
national law it would be a case of the 
breaking of a treaty, and we would stand 
before the world as being guilty of treat- 
ing our treaty as a scrap of paper, 
especially if the world should judge that 
our act of war was without just founda- 
tion or cause. Under such circumstances 
we might move slowly in declaring war, 
when we knew that by doing so we were 
violating the terms of a treaty; also we 
might move slowly in making such a 
treaty if we thought there would be a pos- 
sibility of our being forced, for self- 
protection, to break it. 

Undoubtedly there will be a public de- 
mand that we enter into such a treaty ; but 
from observations of such matters in. 
Washington, it is not likely that the 
Senate will consent to its passage. 

In 1916 Congress declared as the inter- 
national policy of the United States the 
adjusting and settling of "its interna- 
tional disputes through mediation or arbi- 
tration, to the end that war may be honor- 
ably avoided," and stated that it looked 
"with apprehension and disfavor upon a 
general increase of armament throughout 
the world," but realized "that no single 
nation can disarm, and that without a 
common agreement upon the subject every 
considerable power must maintain a rela- 
tive standing in military strength." 

In December, 1926, Senator Borah, 
chairman of the Committee on Foreign 
Affairs of the Senate, introduced a resolu- 
tion providing that it is the view of the 
Senate that war between nations should 
be outlawed, making it a public crime, and 
that every nation should be encouraged to 
agree to punish war instigators and war 
profiteers; that a code of international 
law of peace based upon the outlawing of 
war should be created, and that a judicial 
substitutioa for war should be created in 
the nature of an international court 
modeled on our Federal Supreme Court. 

At the next session Congressman Bur- 
ton, of the Committee on Foreign Affairs 
of the House, will present a joint resolu- 
tion declaring it to be the policy of the 
United States to prohibit the exportation 
of arms, munitions, or implements of war 
to any country in violation of a treaty, 
convention, or other agreement to resort 




to arbitration or other peaceful means for 
the settlement of international contro- 
versies; and Senator Capper, of the Com- 
mittee on Foreign Affairs of the Senate, 
will introduce a resolution providing for 
the renunciation of war as an instrument 
of international policy and the settlement 
of international disputes by arbitration or 

These resolutions demonstrate the de- 
sire on the part of members of Congress 
to promote a constructive foreign policy. 

The diplomatic center of the world is 
at Washington. In that city are found 
more diplomatic representatives of more 
nations than are accredited to the capitals 
of any of the other countries of the world. 
The United States is today the most 
powerful nation. How are we going to 
use this world power? Shall it be in the 
martial sense, in the terms of aggressive 
war, or in the moral sense, in the terms 
of ideals? Nations and empires have 
risen and fallen. If we are to preserve 
ours, it must rest on principles of law 
and Justice. It must not be by force. 
Never have we had an opportunity to ex- 
ercise the power of peace as we have today. 
Our aims have always tended toward 
peace, even though on occasions they may 
have appeared otherwise. 

But who and what are to determine our 
policy of peace? Who can say whether 
our foreign policy of the future will be 
constructive or passive? It will not be 
the President, the Congress, the press, or 
any class. It will be public opinion. It 
is a matter of educating from a false to a 
true standard. If it is possible to educate 
public opinion in one country, it can be 
done in others, and eventually we may 
have a public opinion that shall be inter- 
national. A law does not make men good 
and a treaty will not necessarily make na- 
tions good. This has been proved by the 
frequent breaking of laws by individuals 
and treaties by countries. 

Therefore, in order to enforce national 
or international law, there must be public 
opinion back of it. Then, and only then, 
is it a living force. With it all things are 
possible and without it there is little for 
which we may hope. Public opinion is a 
powerful agency. As a former officer of 
tlic League has stated, there should "be 
an international public opinion which will 

insist on higher standards of international 
morality in international dealings." 

Whether our foreign policy shall be 
passive or constructive must necessa- 
rily depend on international develop- 
ments. Until now it has been construc- 
tive and is constructive. We can well 
be proud of the world position which we 
occupy. The nations look to Washington 
as a diplomatic center of no little im- 
portance. They would not do so if they 
did not believe we had something of a 
constructive nature in our foreign policy. 
Whether one believes our foreign policy to 
be constructive or passive, must one not 
agree with President Coolidge, who, in 
one of his messages to the Congress, has 
said : "The policy of our foreign rela- 
tions, casting aside any suggestion of 
force, rests solely on the foundation of 
peace, good will, and good works." 



NEAE East Eeliefs first task was a 
life-saving job. It was done on a 
huge scale. The Armenian patriarch has 
said that a million people are living today 
in the Caucasus alone who would not be 
living if it were not for the salvage work 
of the American organization. 

The next task was one of education. 
That, too, was done on an immense scale. 
One hundred and thirty-two thousand 
children have passed through the hands 
of Near East Eelief, receiving, each, a 
simple schooling and training in trades for 

During the years when the orphan pop- 
ulation of the institution at Leninakan in 
Armenia hovered about 20,000 every child 
was at some time or other a hospital case. 

These instances of mass opportunity 
suggest the value of mass work. The 
technique of relief was developed quickly 
and thoroughly because of the need of 
giving immediate help. Probably no- 
where else in the world has there ever 
been such a chance for mass education as 
in the Caucasus. Certainly no oculist has 
ever elsewhere studied the dreaded eye 




disease, trachoma, while giving over 2,400 
treatments a day. 

And these large numbers are a consider- 
able factor in the influence that the boys 
and girls who have been in the orphanages 
and are now outplaced in homes or in in- 
dustry or are married and taking their 
place in the social system, have on the 
communities in which they live. The 
East is a world for the old. Wisdom, they 
think, abides only under white hair and 
behind a long beard over there. The im- 
pression made by just one or two children 
when they told what they had learned 
about hygiene and sanitation or about new 
methods of work or ideals of living would, 
as a general thing, be slight. There are 
few personalities so strong as that of the 
young girl "graduate" found by a Near 
East Relief State director when he visited 
a village in the Caucasus. Her room was 
brilliant with sunshine and neat as a pin 
in strong contrast to those of her neigh- 
bors. She was a great believer in the 
value of education, insistently urging the 
village fathers to open a school, and until 
that should happen, herself teaching all 
the children who came to her. She had 
learned the usefulness of the visiting 
nurse, and until the village fathers made 
arrangements to have a visiting nurse she 
passed on what she had learned of first aid 
and preventive medicine, of proper food 
and skilful baby tending. She was a shin- 
ing light. There are very few like her. 

But the influence of a dozen or twenty 
boys and girls, American reared, on a 
small village in Armenia or Syria, on a 
tobacco farm or in a silk mill in Greece, 
is something to be depended on. When 
girls who have belonged to the home- 
making classes at the orphanages on the 
island of Syra or at Leninakan go out into 
service or are adopted into families or set 
up their own homes somewhere near each 
other and do things as they have been 
taught to do them to secure greater effi- 
ciency and saner results, the power of 
numbers is bound to be felt. When lads 
in Greece and Armenia are taught by 
American experts to use agricultural 

methods that are up-to-date and at the 
same time adjusted to local needs, there 
are enough of them to relegate the old 
nail plow to the discard and to supplant 
hit-or-miss seed selection by scientific 
ways of getting good crops. 

In Cairo there is a Working Boys' 
Home which is a sort of spiritual refuge 
for lads who are "graduates" of Near 
East Eelief and are now earning their liv- 
ing, but who need oversight and friendly 
guidance such as they would receive from 
relatives if they had any. Several hun- 
dred of these boys have been taken there 
from Greece and are becoming assimilated 
in the business world of the Egyptian city. 
Not one boy has gotten into trouble or 
has thrown his companions into disrepute 
by any infraction of the law. They are 
clean living, industrious, spontaneously 
religious. They are a product of wise 
training and they are setting their stamp 
on their companions because there are 
enough of them to make what they do 

That these thousands of boys and girls 
of the Near East are going to be a force 
for peace there is little doubt. This 
crossroads of the world, the meeting point 
of Europe and Asia, has been called the 
beginning spot of every large war that has 
ever afflicted Europe. The root of every 
disagreement is a lack of understanding, 
and in this pot that is not a melting pot 
there has boiled every sort of misimder- 

But now there is a new element. Here 
are scores of thousands of boys and girls, 
the growing generation, reared together, 
knowing each other well, unaffected by 
differences of customs because they have 
taken on new customs, knowing the good 
points of companions whose very names 
were anathema to the small town feudists 
that were their ancestors. These young 
people are not going to quarrel with each 
other or come to blows. And there are 
132,000 to enforce the doctrine of peace. 
There is such a thing as a spiritual im- 
pact. Here is an example of it. 





Colonel Medical Reserve, General StafE, United States Army 

Since there is general agreement that in 
our ungoverned world our country sliould be 
protected by "adequate defense," and since 
"adequate defense" is subject to differing in- 
terpretations, the Advocate of Peace wel- 
comes articles calculated to clarify the prob- 
lem. — JiJditob. 

THE program of the American Peace 
Society advocates "patriotic and 
staunch support of American traditions" 
and "adequate national defense." It like- 
wise advocates periodic assemblages of 
enlightened leaders of the various peoples 
for useful discussions of world problems, 
upon which concerted action may aliect 
permanent friendships among peoples and 

Who in our country is a militarist, who 
that wears the uniform of our country's 
national police forces, the army and the 
navy, ever wanted war? What President, 
what Cabinet officer, or what Congress 
ever acceded to war unless forced by pop- 
ular clamor, which has many times called 
for aggressive action, but has been re- 
fused until the conscience of the common 
citizen could not stand for any more de- 
lay? President McKinley kept us out of 
the Spanish-American War until the pop- 
ular cry, "Remember the Maine" forced 
us into it. President Wilson kept us out 
of war, even though the bomb from the 
German Seehoote carried down the Lusi- 
tania and until the menace of becoming a 
subject to the "All Highest" brought us to 
the realization that we would have to fight 
to preserve our standing as a nation, as 
sometimes we have to fight to keep the 
peace. Has not President Coolidge kept 
us out of war and aggression on Mexico 
despite the demands from the capitalists, 
the Ku Klux Klan, and the religionists? 

One department of our government lias 
a misleading title ; it should be called the 
Bureau of National Defense. The War, 
N'a\7^, and State Departments are not and 
never have been busy, and never will be, 
in preparing for war, except for defense. 
More than ^',300 years ago Plato ad- 
vised that every precaution should be 
taken to avoid the occasions of war. He 

showed that the primary cause was in- 
crease in population, meaning land hun- 
ger, which has become very acute in some 
European and Asiatic nations. The sec- 
ond is foreign trade, which causes inev- 
itable disputes — indeed, "competitive trade 
is a form of war; peace is only a name" 
(Laws 622). Foreign trade requires a 
large navy to protect it, and "navalism is 
as bad as militarism." He warned that 
"unless the Greeks form a Pan-Hellenic 
league of nations the virile Greek race 
would some day fall under the yoke of 
barbarism"; for with peoples there always 
has been "a will to war, a will to power, 
and a will to overpower,'" as Nietsche 
says. The wars of the last 50 years have 
been economic wars, by virtue of which 
283,000,000 white "Christians" rule 920,- 
000,000 "backward" colored people. 

There is, too, another cause, the one 
which overthrew the ancient nations. The 
fat and sleek herd goes all to beef and 
udders, breeding progeny without horns, 
and does not show that bristling wall 
against the foe. It can only moan and 
bellow while the wolves of disorder, of 
Communism, mingle with the flock and 
hamstring the few protectors from the 
rear. Are we not passing through the 
phase of national existence with our peri- 
odic private assemblages, our village 
democratic meetings, which may interfere 
with the orderly routine of republican 
government. For more than a century 
our Constitution, and that of the British 
for more than two centuries, has estaB- 
lished a balance of power, peace, and 
prosperity which has not yet been radi- 
cally disturbed, but which may some day 
find its last affinities in mediocracy by 
equalization of the classes, the result of 
Socialism and Communism. 

The struggle for human existence is 
war, in which we individually and collec- 
tively daily fight for peace. This is a 
peaceful people, as all the world knows; 
but to dream idly of peace or to diminish 
our national insurance against war by 
further cutting down of our police forces 




is not a guarantee against attack, but is an 
incitation from without and a sure way to 
invite a million or more of misfits and 
morons in this country to envy and to 
attack us who have homes and families 
well worth working for and well worth 
defending. The surest means of preserv- 
ing an honorable peace is that which is 
one of the axioms of this association, a 
"real and adequate system of national de- 

In the fable of Antisthenes the lions 
said to the hares when, in the council of 
beasts, the latter began haranging and 
claiming equality for all: "Where are 
your claws ?" 

We are even now engaged in a civilian 
war with malcontents, who at the instiga- 
tion of Communists from without have 
duped by unholy propaganda, which is far 
more dangerous than shot or shell or 
poison gas, at the instigation of Com- 
munists from without, which is aimed at 
the undermining of the foundations of 
our Government. This little handful of 
Communists has already more than a mil- 
lion dupes, who are fed with more than a 
thousand publications a year. It has sev- 
eral hundreds of hireling and glib-tongue 
speakers who have insinuated themselves 
into respectable organizations, who advo- 
cate action which would destroy all we 
cherish, by leading us into the uncharted 
seas of internationalism and Communism. 
This scum at the top and the dregs at the 
bottom are very weU known to those who 
are watching for the welfare of our in- 
stitutions, but the War Department in 
times of peace has to leave then* supervi- 
sion to the civilians. They have made 
little impression upon such fine organiza- 
tions of working men as the American 
Federation of Labor, which has blown 
away the scum and strained out the 

My profession is a war for the preserva- 
tion of life and the conservation of human 
effort. For forty years I have fought 
disease; during these four decaSes I have 
also been a citizen-soldier, trained and 
ready at any time to protect my family, 
my home, and my neighbors at the call of 
my country. During this time I have 
never found a militarist resulting from 
the education of our youth by training in 

the schools and colleges. I have seen 
many eminent men developed as the re- 
sult of this training in obedience and 
command. I have never in all my ex- 
perience met a man whose hand was worth 
shaking who would refuse to take his part 
in the protection of his country by up- 
holding the fundamental law of the land. 
Those who will not support our Constitu- 
tion have no right to our protection and 
should get out of our country. 

There is no question about the outlawry 
of war; it ever has been beyond all man- 
made laws. It is fatal to the individual, 
but it is sometimes good for the race. 
Our country was born by the War of the 
American Revolution; it grew by the 
French and Indian War, that of 1812, 
and the Mexican War; was preserved by 
the War of the Rebellion, and now only 
exists as a sovereign entity, the greatest 
of all nations, by the fact that we refused 
to be vassals of a foreign-language power 
some ten years ago. 

My own profession was advanced a life- 
time by the lessons gained by medical 
military service; our span of life has 
gained five years ; our children average an 
inch taller, and, although we preserve 
some of the physical defectives, perhaps 
to our disadvantage — all are largely by 
the result of medical knowledge gained 
in military service to our country. Yel- 
low fever, smallpox, typhoid and typhus 
fevers, malaria and other scourges have 
been conquered, and venereal disease is 
greatly lessened by our medical national 
defense supervised by the National Gov- 
ernment. The morals of the military 
trained man is, on the average, much bet- 
ter than that of one who has not had this 
education. Aviation is years and years 
ahead. The young men of the country 
learned habits of obedience and of com- 
mand and learned of our institutions from 
the lessons given them during the war. 

The plans for the national defense in 
peace have been confined to the minimum 
by reason of the insufficient appropria- 
tions of Congress, and therefore less than 
50 per cent of our national defense would 
be available for our protection in case of 
national emergency. While our resources 
in men are almost inexhaustible, it would 
take six months to train them. We need 




nearly 300,000 officers, of whom 240,000 
would come from civilian life. Officers 
cannot be even partially trained in a year. 
However, the 12,000 of the Eegular Army 
and 10,000 of the Guard form a cadre to 
which may be immediately added the 
110,000 business men now holding com- 
missions in the Eeserve, although only 
one-fourth of the latter have had reason- 
able training for service. Under the As- 
sistant Secretary of War, the resources and 
manufactures of the country have been 
and are being thoroughly studied, and the 
co-operation of the business men for na- 
tional defense has been secured. For in- 
stance, in Seattle some 500 prominent 
citizens are studying resources of the 
Northwest each year, prepared to assist 
in the supply of the civilians and of the 
96th Division, which is allocated to Wash- 
ington, Oregon, and Alaska. 

Our influence has uniformly been used 
for peace. For more than forty years our 
State Department has been seeking to 
solve the long-standing dispute between 
Chile and Peru over the possession of the 
Province of Tacna-Arica, arising out of 
the war between those countries in 1879. 

The friendly efforts of the United States 
are being exerted to secure the settlement 
of such a boundary question in no less 
than five cases : Between Peru, Colombia, 
and Brazil ; between Haiti and the Domin- 
ican Republic ; between Panama and Costa 
Rica; between Nicaragua and Honduras; 
and between Honduras and Guatemala. 
Better evidence of our pacific policy could 
hardly be offered. 

Our Government has been asked and 
has granted its assistance in matters re- 
quiring expert advice — matters of sanita- 
tion, finance, economic development, or 
military instruction. Examples of such 

cases are General Gorgas' visit to Guaya- 
quil, Ecuador, for yellow-fever prevention ; 
mission of another health specialist to 
Chile; of a police expert to Panama; of 
experts on financial administration to 
Colombia, Peru, and several other coun- 
tries; military or naval missions of in- 
struction to Brazil and Peru. Our Gov- 
ernment schools of agriculture and our 
Military Academy at West Point are open 
for instruction to their young men. 

All countries have plans for defense, and 
the authorities know the plans of most of 
them, not only for their own defense, but 
those which have been studied out for an 
attack upon the United States of America. 
However, there is one great power and its 
constitutional provinces with whom any- 
thing but academic difficulties are almost 
unthinkable, and that is Great Britain in 
Europe, America, Africa, and Australia. 

Jesus Christ said : "When a strong man 
armed keepeth his palace, his goods are 
in peace. But when a stronger than he 
shall come upon him and overcome him, 
he taketh from him all his armor wherein 
he trusteth, and divideth the spoils." 

To know one another by intervisiting 
of educated people, as those of Canada and 
America, with like laws and customs, is 
the greatest guarantee against anything 
but trivial disputes, which are readUy 
settled by arbitration. But, until the 
millennium arrives, others will not be free 
of jealousy and covetousness ; we will 
have to keep up our national insurance by 
a reasonable national defense system, ac- 
cording to the Constitution of the United 
States, which requires every able-bodied 
male citizen between the ages of 18 and 45 
to be a potential arms bearer, to protect 
our lives, our liberty, and to insure oppor- 
tunity for the pursuit of happiness. 






28, 1927 

On the 28th of December the State De- 
partment sent a note to the French Govern- 
ment in reply to the proposal of M. Briand, 
which is as follows: 

"I have the honor to refer to the form of 
treaty entitled 'Draft of Pact of Perpetual 
Friendship between France and the United 
States,' which His Excellency the Minister 
of Foreign Affairs was good enough to trans- 
mit to me informally last June through the 
instrumentality of the American Ambassador 
at Paris. 

"This draft treaty proposes that the two 
powers should solemnly declare in the name 
of their respective peoples that they condemn 
recourse to war, renounce it as an instru- 
ment of their national policy towards each 
other, and agree that a settlement of dis- 
putes arising between them, of whatsoever 
nature or origin they may be, shall never 
be sought by either party except through 
pacific means. I have given the most care- 
ful consideration to this proposal and take 
this occasion warmly to reciprocate on behalf 
of the American people the lofty sentiments 
of friendship which inspired the French 
people, through His Excellency M. Briand, to 
suggest the proposed treaty. 

"The Government of the United States wel- 
comes every opportunity for joining with the 
other governments of the world in condemn- 
ing war and pledging anew its faith in 
arbitration. It is firmly of the opinion that 
every international endorsement of arbitra- 
tion and every treaty repudiating the idea 
of a resort to arms for the settlement of 
justiciable disputes materially advances the 
cause of world peace. My views on this sub- 
ject find a concrete expression in the form 
of the arbitration treaty which I have pro- 
posed in my note to you of December 28, 
1927, to take the place of the arbitration con- 
vention of 1908. The proposed treaty ex- 
tends the scope of that convention and re- 
cords the unmistakable determination of the 

two governments to prevent any breach in 
the friendly relations which have subsisted 
between them for so long a period. 

"In view of the traditional friendship be- 
tween France and the United States — a 
friendship which happily is not dependent 
upon the existence of any formal engage- 
ment — and in view of the common desire of 
the two nations never to resort to arms in 
the settlement of such controversies as may 
possibly arise between them, which is re- 
corded in the draft arbitration treaty just 
referred to, it has occurred to me that the 
two governments, instead of contenting 
themselves with a bilateral declaration of 
the nature suggested by M. Briand, might 
make a more signal contribution to world 
peace by joining in an effort to obtain the 
adherence of all of the principal powers of 
the world to a declaration renouncing war as 
an instrument of national policy. Such a 
declaration, if executed by the principal 
world powers, could not but be an impressive 
example to all the other nations of the world, 
and might conceivably lead such nations to 
subscribe in their turn to the same instru- 
ment, thus perfecting among all the powers 
of the world an arrangement heretofore sug- 
gested only as between France and the 
United States. 

"The Government of the United States is 
prepared, therefore, to concert with the Gov- 
ernment of France with a view to the con- 
clusion of a treaty among the principal 
powers of the world, open to signature by all 
nations, condemning war and renouncing it 
as an instrument of national policy in favor 
of the pacific settlement of international dis- 
putes. If the Government of France is will- 
ing to join with the Government of the 
United States in this endeavor, and to enter 
with the United States and the other prin- 
cipal powers of the world into an appropriate 
multilateral treaty, I shall be happy to en- 
gage at once in conversations looking to the 
preparation of a draft treaty following the 
lines suggested by M. Briand for submission 




by France and the United States jointly to 
the other nations of the world." 

At the same time the Secretary of State 
transmitted to the French Government a 
draft of a proposed treaty of arbitration re- 
placing the Arbitration Treaty of February 
10, 1908, which expires on February 27, 1928. 
This proposed treaty of arbitration is, of 
course, entirely separate from the reply to 
M. Briand's proposal. Identic arbitration 
treaties are being submitted to other powers 
having arbitration treaties with the United 
States which expire shortly. 


"Mr. Secretary of State: 

"By a letter of December 28th last Your 
Excellency was kind enough to make known 
the sentiments of the Government of the 
United States concerning the suggestion of 
a treaty proposed by the Government of the 
Republic in the month of June, 1927, with 
a view to the condemnation of war and the 
renunciation thereof as an instrument of 
national policy between France and the 
United States. 

"According to Your Excellency, the two 
governments, instead of limiting themselves 
to a bilateral treaty, would contribute more 
fully to the peace of the world by uniting 
their efforts to obtain the adhesion of all 
the principal powers of the world to a dec- 
laration renouncing war as an instrument of 
their national policy. 

"Such a declaration, if it were subscribed 
to by the principal powers, could not fail to 
be an impressive example to all the nations 
of the world and might very well lead them 
to subscribe in their turn to the same pact, 
thus bringing into effect, as among all the 
nations of the world, an arrangement which 
at first was only suggested as between France 
and the United States. 

"The Government of the United States, 
therefore, would be disposed to join the Gov- 
ernment of the Republic with a view to con- 
cluding a treaty between the principal powers 
of the world which, open to the signature of 
all nations, would condemn war, would con- 
tain a declaration to renounce it as an in- 
strument of national policy, and would sub- 
stitute therefor the pacific settlement of dis- 
putes between nations. 

"Your Excellency added that if the Gov- 
ernment of the Republic agrees thus to join 

the Government of the United States and the 
other principal powers of the world in an 
appropriate multilateral treaty, Your Ex- 
cellency would be happy to undertake im- 
mediately conversations leading to the elabo- 
ration of a draft inspired by the suggestions 
of M. Briand and destined to be proposed 
jointly by France and the United States to 
the other nations of the world. 

"The Government of the Republic ap- 
preciated sincerely the favorable reception 
given by the Government of the United States 
to the proposal of M. Briand. It believes 
that the procedure suggested by Your Ex- 
cellency and carried out in a manner agree- 
able to public opinion and to the popular 
sentiment of the different nations seems to 
be of such nature as to satisfy the views of 
the French Government. It would be ad- 
vantageous immediately to sanction the gen- 
eral character of this procedure by aflfixing 
the signatures of France and the United 

"I am authorized to inform you that the 
Government of the Republic is disposed to 
join with the Government of the United 
States in proposing, for agreement by all 
nations, a treaty to be signed at the present 
time by France and the United States, and 
under the terms of which the high contract- 
ing parties shall renounce all war of aggres- 
sion and shall declare that for the settle- 
ment of differences of whatever nature which 
may arise between them they will employ all 
pacific means. The high contracting parties 
will engage to bring this treaty to the atten- 
tion of all States and invite them to adhere. 

"The Government of the Republic is con- 
vinced that the principles thus proclaimed 
cannot but be received with gratitude by the 
entire world, and it does not doubt that the 
efforts of the two governments to insure uni- 
versal adoption will be crowned with full 

"Accept, Mr. Secretary, the assurances of 
my high consideration, etc. 

"Patji. Claudel." 

ARY 11 

On the 11th of January the Secretary of 
State sent the following note to the French 
Ambassador : 


"In the reply which your government was 
good enough to make to my note of December 




28, 1927, His Excellency the Minister of For- 
eign Affairs summarized briefly the proposal 
presented by the Government of the United 
States, and stated that it appeared to be of 
such a nature as to satisfy the views of the 
French Government. In these circumstances 
he added that the Government of the Re- 
public vpas disposed to join with the Gov- 
ernment of the United States in proposing 
for acceptance by all nations a treaty to be 
signed at the present time by France and the 
United States, under the terms of which the 
high contracting parties should renounce all 
wars of aggression and should declare that 
they would employ all peaceful means for the 
settlement of any differences that might 
arise between them. 

"The Government of the United States is 
deeply gratified that the Government of 
France has seen its way clear to accept in 
principle its proposal that, instead of the bi- 
lateral pact originally suggested by M. 
Briand, there be negotiated among the prin- 
cipal powers of the world an equivalent 
multilateral treaty open to signature by all 
nations. There can be no doubt that such a 
multilateral treaty would be a far more effec- 
tive instrument for the promotion of pacific 
relations than a mere agreement between 
France and the United States alone, and if 
the present efforts of the two governments 
achieve ultimate success, they will have made 
a memorable contribution to the cause of 
world peace. 

"While the Government of France and the 
Government of the United States are now 
closely in accord so far as the multilateral 
feature of the proposed treaty is concerned, 
the language of M. Briand's note of Jan- 
uary 5, 1928, is in two respects open to an 
interpretation not in harmony with the idea 
which the Government of the United States 
had in mind when it submitted to you the 
proposition outlined in my note of December 
28, 1927. In the first place, it appears to be 
the thought of your government that the pro- 
posed multilateral treaty be signed in the 
first instance by France and the United 
States alone, and then submitted to the other 
powers for their acceptance. In the opinion 
of the Government of the United States this 
procedure is open to the objection that a 
treaty, even though acceptable to France and 
the United States, might for some reason be 
unacceptable to one of the other great powers. 
In such event the treaty could not come into 

force and the present efforts of France and 
the United States would be rendered abor- 
tive. This unhappy result would not neces- 
sarily follow a disagreement as to termi- 
nology arising prior to the definitive ap- 
proval by any government of a proposed form 
of treaty, since it is by no means unreason- 
able to suppose that the views of the gov- 
ernments concerned could be accommodated 
through informal prelimintary discussions 
and a text devised which would be acceptable 
to them all. Both France and the United 
States are too deeply interested in the suc- 
cess of their endeavors for the advancement 
of peace to be willing to jeopardize the ulti- 
mate accomplishment of their purpose by in- 
curring unnecessary risk of disagreement 
with the other powers concerned, and I have 
no doubt that your government will be en- 
tirely agreeable to joining with the Govern- 
ment of the United States and the govern- 
ments of the other powers concerned for the 
purpose of reaching a preliminary agreement 
as to the language to be used in the proposed 
treaty, thus obviating all danger of confront- 
ing the other powers with a definitive treaty 
unacceptable to them. As indicated below, 
the Government of the United States would 
be pleased if the Government of France 
would agree that the draft treaty submitted 
by M. Briand last June should be made the 
basis of such preliminary discussions. 

"In the second place, and this point is 
closely related to what goes before, M. 
Briand's reply of January 5, 1928, in express- 
ing the willingness of the Government of 
France to join with the Government of the 
United States in proposing a multilateral 
treaty for the renunciation of war, apparently 
contemplates that the scope of such treaty 
should be limited to wars of aggression. 
The form of treaty which your government 
submitted to me last June, which was the 
subject of my note of December 28, 1927, 
contained no such qualification or limitation. 
On the contrary, it provided unequivocally 
for the renunciation by the high contracting 
parties of all war as an instrument of na- 
tional policy in the following terms : 

"Article 1 

" 'The high contracting powers solemnly 
declare, in the name of the French people and 
the people of the United States of America, 
that they condemn recourse to war and re- 
nounce it respectively as an instrument of 
their national policy towards each other. 




"Abticxe 2 

" 'The settlement or the solution of all dis- 
putes or conflicts, of whatever nature or of 
whatever origin they may be, which may 
arise between France and the United States 
of America shall never be sought by either 
side except by pacific means.' " 

"I am not informed of the reasons which 
have led your government to suggest this 
modification of its original proposal, but I 
earnestly hope that it is of no particular 
significance, and that it is not to be taken as 
an indication that the Government of France 
will find itself unable to join with the Gov- 
ernment of the United States in proposing, 
as suggested above, that the original formula 
submitted by M. Briand, which envisaged the 
unqualified renunciation of all war as an in- 
strument of national policy, be made the sub- 
ject of preliminary discussions with the other 
great powers for the purpose of reaching a 
tentative agreement as to the language to be 
used in the proposed treaty. 

"If your government is agreeable to the 
plan outlined above and is willing that fur- 
ther discussions of the terms of the proposed 
multilateral treaty be based upon the original 
proposal submitted to me by M. Briand last 
June, I have the honor to suggest that the 
Government of France join with the Gov- 
ernment of the United States in a communi- 
cation to the British, German, Italian, and 
Japanese governments, transmitting the text 
of M. Briand's original proposal and copies 
of the subsequent correspondence between 
the governments of France and the United 
States for their consideration and comment, 
it being understood, of course, that these 
preliminary discussions would in no way 
commit any of the participating govern- 
ments pending the conclusion of a definitive 

"Accept, Excellency, the renewed assur- 
ances of my highest consideration. 

"Frank B. Keixogg." 


Following is the text of the latest note 
sent to Secretary Kellogg by Foreign 
Minister Briand, according to the New 
York Times of January 22 : 

Your Excellency was pleased to communi- 
cate to me by letter on tlie 11th instant, 
observations which were suggested by my 

letter of January 5, replying to your com- 
munication of December 28, 1927. My gov- 
ernment has asked me to express its satis- 
faction, seeing that, thanks to Your Excel- 
lency, our government's views draw more 
closely together concerning the best method 
to follow to realize the project based upon 
essential principles on which they appear in 

The original French proposal of June, 1927, 
envisaging a private act between Prance and 
the United States, appeared, in the opinion of 
the French Government, as desirable and 
realizable by reason of the historic relation 
between the two republics. 

Agreeing only to place at the head of the 
Franco-American arbitration treaty in pro- 
cess of renewal, a declaration proposed by 
the French Government, the Government of 
the United States for its own motives, of 
which the French Government is willing to 
take account, it esteemed that it was advis- 
able to extend this manifestation against war 
and make it the subject of a separate act, 
calling in other powers to participate. 

The Government of the Republic did not 
refuse to see its original plan thus amplified, 
but did not dissimulate, and even decided to 
emphasize, that the new negotiations pro- 
posed would be more complex and of a 
nature to encounter divers difficulties. 

The question of knowing whether the act 
thus envisaged as being multipartite would 
gain or not by being first signed by France 
and the United States or whether it should 
first be prepared between certain of the prin- 
cipal powers of the world and offered for 
signatures of all is essentially one of pro- 

The Government of the Republic only 
formulated its suggestion in the desire of 
arriving more quickly and surely at the re- 
sult which it seeks, together with the United 
States — that is to say, it is disix»sed to adopt 
tlie method, whatever it may be, which may 
appear most practical. 

There exists, however, a situation of fact 
upon which my government has asked me 
particularly to draw your attention. 

It cannot have been overlooked by the 
United States that the great majority of 
world powers are making, for the organiza- 
tion and strengthening of peace, common 
efforts, which they are following out within 
the bounds of the I^eague of Nations. They 
are already bound one to the other by a com- 




pact creating for each other reciprocal obli- 
gations, both by accords such as those con- 
cluded at Locarno in October, 1925, and by 
international conventions relating to guaran- 
tees of neutrality, and all of them are en- 
gagements which impose upon them duties 
they cannot break. 


Before the Pan American Conference at 
Havana, Cuba, on the 16th day of January, 
1928, in the forenoon. President Coolidge 
spoke as follows: 

Mb. President and Members of the Pan 

American Conference: 

No citizen of any of the Americas could 
come to the queen of the islands of the West 
Indies without experiencing an emotion of 
gratitude and reverence. These are the out- 
posts of the new civilization of the Western 
Hemisphere. It was among them that the 
three small ships of the heroic Admiral came 
when, with the assistance and support of 
Spain, Columbus presented to Europe the first 
widespread, public, and authoritative knowl- 
edge of the New World. Other points may 
have been previously visited, but for these 
was reserved the final revelation. The Great 
Discoverer brought with him the seed of more 
republics, the promise of greater human free- 
dom, than ever crossed the seas on any other 
voyage. With him sailed immortal declara- 
tions of independence and great charters of 
self-government. He laid out a course that 
led from despotism to democracy. Edward 
Everett Hale, a seer of New England, tells 
us that this gallant seaman, who rose above 
the storms to become the forerunner of an 
age of pioneers, 

"Left blood and guilt and tyranny behind. 

Sailing still West the hidden shore to find ; 

For all mankind that unstained scroll un- 

Where God might write anew the story of 
the World." 

In the spirit of Christopher Columbus all 
of the Americas have an eternal bond of 
unity, a common heritage bequeathed to us 
alone. Unless we together redeem the prom- 
ise which his voyage held for humanity, it 
must remain forever void. This is the des- 
tiny which Pan America has been chosen to 

As we look back over the accomplishments 
of the past four centuries, we can see that 
we are warranted in asserting that the West- 
ern Hemisphere has not failed in the service 
that it seemed destined to render to human- 
ity. Progress does not go forward in a 
straight line. It is a succession of waves. 
We cannot always ride on their crest, but 
among our republics the main tide of human 
advancement has been steadily rising. The 
people have taken charge of their own affairs. 
In spite of some temporary discouragements, 
they have on the whole been successful. The 
fertility of a virgin soil, a wealth of mineral 
deposits, an abundance of water power, a 
multitude of navigable rivers, all at the com- 
mand of a resourceful people, have produced 
a material prosperity greater in amount and 
more widely distributed than ever before fell 
to the lot of the human race. The arts and 
sciences have fiourished, the advantages of 
education are widespread, devotion to re- 
ligion is marked by its sincerity. The spirit 
of liberty is universal. An attitude of peace 
and good will prevails among our nations. 
A determination to adjust differences among 
ourselves, not by a resort to force, but by 
the application of the principles of justice 
and equity, is one of our strongest character- 
istics. The sovereignty of small nations is 
respected. It is for the purpose of giving 
stronger guaranties to these principles, of in- 
creasing the amount and extending the 
breadth of these blessings, that this confer- 
ence has been assembled. 

The very place where we are meeting is a 
complete demonstration of the progress we 
are making. Thirty years ago Cuba ranked 
as a foreign possession, torn by revolution 
and devastated by hostile forces. Such gov- 
ernment as existed rested on military force. 
Today Cuba is her own sovereign. Her 
people are independent, free, prosperous, 
peaceful, and enjoying the advantages of self- 
government. The last important area has 
taken her place among the republics of the 
New World. Our fair hostess has raised her- 
self to a high and honorable position among 
the nations of the earth. The intellectual 
qualities of the Cuban people have won for 
them a permanent place in science, art, and 
literature, and their production of staple com- 
modities has made them an important factor 
in the economic structure of the world. They 
have reached a position in the stability of 
their government, in the genuine exoression 




of their public opinion at tlie ballot box, and 
In the recognized soundness of their public 
credit that has commanded universal respect 
and admiration. What Cuba has done others 
have done and are doing. 

It is a heavy responsibility which rests upon 
the people and the governments represented 
at this conference. Unto them has been 
given a new land, free from the traditional 
jealousies and hatreds of the Old World, 
where the people might come into the fullest 
state of development. It is among the re- 
publics of this hemisphere that the principle 
of human rights has had its broadest appli- 
cation ; where political freedom and equality 
and economic opportunity have made their 
greatest advance. Our most sacred trust has 
been, and is, the establishment and expansion 
of the spirit of democracy. No doubt we 
shall make some false starts and experience 
some disappointing reactions; but we have 
put our confidence in the ultimate wisdom of 
the people. We believe we can rely on their 
intelligence, their honesty, and their char- 
acter. We are thoroughly committed to the 
principle that they are better fitted to govern 
themselves than anyone else is to govern 
them. We do not claim immediate perfec- 
tion, but we do expect continual progress. 
Our history reveals that in such expectation 
we have not been disappointed. It is better 
for the people to make their own mistakes 
than to have some one else make their mis- 
takes for them. 

Next to our attachment to the principle of 
self-government has been our attachment to 
the policy of peace. When the republics of 
the Western Hemisphere gained their inde- 
pendence, they were compelled to fight for it. 
They have always been a brave, resolute, and 
detei'mined people, willing to make any sacri- 
fices to defend what they believed to be their 
rights. But, when once their rights have 
been secured, they have been almost equally 
solicitous to respect the rights of others. 
Their chief efforts have been devoted to the 
arts of peace. They have never come under 
the delusion of military grandeur. Nowhere 
among these republics have great military 
establishments ever been maintained for the 
purpose of overawing or subjugating other 
nations. We have all nourished a commend- 
able sentiment of moderate preparation for 
national defense, believing that for a nation 
to be unreasonably neglectful of the military 
art, even if it did not invite and cause such 
aggression as to result either in war or in 

abject humiliation, it must finally lead to a 
disastrous disintegration of the very moral 
fiber of the nation. But it is one thing to be 
prepared to defend our rights as a last ex- 
tremity and quite another to rely on force 
where reason ought to prevail. The form of 
our governments guarantees us against the 
Old World dynastic wars. It is scarcely too 
much to say that the conflicts which have 
been waged by our republics for 150 years 
have been almost entirely for the purpose 
of securing independence and extending the 
domain of human freedom. When these have 
been accomplished, we have not failed to 
heed the admonition to beat our swords into 

We have kept the peace so largely among 
our requblics because democracies are peace- 
loving. The are founded on the desire to 
promote the general welfare of the people, 
which is seldom accomplished by warfare. 
In addition to this we have adopted a spirit 
of accommodation, good will, confidence, and 
mutual helpfulness. We have been slow to 
anger and plenteous in mercy. When this 
attitude prevails it is not diflicult to find 
practical means of adjusting differences. 
The statesmanship of the southern American 
republics has shown a peculiar skill and 
aptitude in this field. It began with mutual 
consultation. The first Pan American Ck)n- 
gress assembled at Panama City about 100 
years ago. The purpose of that gathering 
has never been forgotten and it may be said 
to have marked the beginning of a permanent 
Institution. The republics south of the Rio 
Grande have produced a most impressive rec- 
ord of a resort to mediation, arbitration, 
and other peaceful methods of the adjust- 
ment and adjudication of their international 
differences. A study of their treaties will 
disclose some of the finest examples of 
mutual covenants for the limitation of arma- 
ments and the avoidance of hostile conflict. 
In the discovery of the true principles of 
international relations and in the practical 
ability of putting them into effect, they have 
demonstrated a moral power and strength 
of character for which the whole world 
should be profoundly grateful. 

The Pan American Ck>nferences meet for 
the purpose of maintaining and extending 
these important principles. It is impossible 
to conceive of a more inspiring motive which 
men could entertain in dealing with the 
affairs of this world. You have convened 




to take counsel together for increasing thie 
domestic welfare of the free people of our 
independent republics and promoting inter- 
national peace. No other part of the world 
could provide constituencies which all have 
such a unity of purpose. The whole at- 
mosphere of the conference is animated with 
the spirit of democracy and good will. This 
is the fundamental concept of your organiza- 
tion. All nations here represented stand on 
an exact footing of equality. The smallest 
and the weakest speaks here with the same 
authority as the largest and the most power- 
ful. You come together under the present 
condition and the future expectation of pro- 
found peace. You are continuing to strike 
a new note in international gatherings by 
maintaining a forum in which not the selfish 
interests of a few, but the general welfare 
of all, will be considered. 

If you are to approximate your past suc- 
cesses, it will be because you do not hesitate 
to meet facts squarely. We must consider 
not only our strength but our weaknesses. 
We must give thought not only to our 
excellence but to our defects. The attitude 
of the open mind must prevail. Most of all, 
you must be guided by patience, tolerance, 
and charity, judging your sister nations not 
only by their accomplishments, but also by 
their aspirations. A Divine Providence has 
made us a neighborhood of republics. It is 
impossible to suppose that it was for the 
purpose of making us hostile to each other, 
but from time to time to reveal to us the 
methods by which we might secure the ad- 
vantages and blessings of enduring friend- 

Like the subjects which have occupied the 
attention of your predecessors, the topics 
contained in the agenda of the present con- 
ference call for co-operative international 
action. They belong to the class of inquiries 
that produce closer international relations, 
promoting the good of aU in the political, 
economic, social, and cultural spheres. Your 
predecessors have shown great wasdom in 
directing their attention to the matters that 
unite and strengthen us in friendly collabo- 
ration — subjects that develop an inter-Amer- 
ican unity of sentiment which alone can 
make our common endeavors fruitful. 

The existence of this conference, held for 
the consideration of measures of purely 
American concern, involves no antagonism 
toward any other section of the world or any 

other organization. It means that the inde- 
pendent republics of the Western Hemi- 
sphere, animated by the same ideals, enjoy- 
ing the common blessings of freedom and 
peace, realize that there are many matters 
of mutual interest and importance which can 
best be investigated and resolved through 
the medium of such friendly contact and 
negotiation as is necessary for co-operative 
action. We realize that one of the most im- 
portant services which we can render to 
humanity, the one for which we are pecu- 
liarly responsible, is to maintain the ideals 
of our Western World. That is our obliga- 
tion. No one else can discharge it for us. 
If it is to be met, we must meet it ourselves. 
We must join together in assuring condi- 
tions under which our republics will have 
the freedom and the responsibility of work- 
ing out their own destiny in their own way. 

The proceedings of the successive Pan 
American conferences reveal a record of 
achievement which, without attempting the 
spectacular, constantly builds on the solid 
foundation of the immediately attainable. 
With each succeeding conference the agree- 
ments for the orderly settlement of such 
differences as may arise between the Ameri- 
can republics have been extended and 
strengthened, thus making their relationship 
more certain and more secure. Each con- 
ference has contributed its share toward de- 
veloping more intimate cultural ties among 
the nations of this hemisphere and establish- 
ing new currents of mutual imderstandlng. 
Obstacles to closer economic relations have 
been removed, thus clearing the pathways 
of commercial intercourse. 

Of scarcely less importance have been the 
many special conferences which from time to 
time have assembled for the puri>ose of deal- 
ing with the more technical questions in the 
relations between the republics of America. 
The meetings of the International Commis- 
sion of Jurists, the Pan American Highway 
Conferences, the Child Welfare Conferences, 
the Sanitary Conferences, the Conference on 
Consular Procedure, the Scientific Congresses, 
the Financial Conferences, the Red Cross 
Conferences, and the highly important and 
significant Congress of Journalists have all 
served to strengthen that spirit of Pan 
American solidarity which, in the last anal- 
ysis, represents one of the greatest achieve- 
ments of our American civilization and one 




which, in the future, is destined to play so 
important a part in the fulfillment of the 
high mission intrusted to the republics of 
this hemisphere. 

It has been most gratifying to witness the 
increasing interchange of tmiversity profes- 
sors and the constantly growing stream of 
student migration from one country to an- 
other. No other influence can be more potent 
and effective in promoting mutual compre- 
hension of national aims and ideals. It is 
sincerely to be hoped that this cultural inter- 
change will with each year assume larger 

It is not desirable that we should attempt 
to be all alike. Progress is not secured 
through uniformity and similarity, but rather 
through multiplicity and diversity. We 
should all be intent on maintaining our own 
institutions and customs, preserving the 
purity of our own language and literature, 
fostering the ideals of our own culture and 
society. In a territory reaching from the 
north temperate zone through the tropics to 
the south pole, there is room enough for 
every worthy activity which is profitable and 
every ideal which is good. Our geographical 
location, as well as our political ideals, has 
endowed us with a self-contained unity and 
Independence. Instead of considering our 
variations as an obstacle, we ought to relize 
that they are a contribution to harmonious 
political and economic relations. 

In this great work of furthering inter- 
American understanding, a large responsi- 
bility rests upon the press of all countries. 
In our present stage of civilization, knowl- 
edge of foreign people is almost wholly sup- 
plied from that source. By misinterpreting 
facts, or by carelessness in presenting them 
in their true light, much damage can be 
done. While great progress has been made 
toward the publication of fuller information 
and unbiased views, a better exchange of 
news service would do much to promote 
mutual knowledge and understanding. What 
happens in this hemisphere is of more vital 
interest to all of us than what happens 
across any of the oceans. 

An increase of information depends largely 
on an increase in the means of communica- 
tion. During the entire nineteenth century 
intercourse between the American republics 
was exceedingly diflScult, and this isolation 
proved a serious obstacle to closer under- 
standing. The twentieth century, however. 

and especially the last ten years, have wit- 
nessed astonishing changes in this respect. 
Trasportation by water has become rapid, 
comfortable, and relatively inexpensive. 
Shipping facilities from the United States 
have been largely improved. Our govern- 
ment is greatly interested in increasing their 
efiiciency. Railway lines have been extended, 
so that it will soon be possible to travel with 
practically no interruption from the northern 
border of the United States to the southern 
border of El Salvador, and in South America 
from Peru to Patagonia. During very recent 
years every government of this hemisphere 
has been giving special attention to the build- 
ing of highways, partly with a view to estab- 
lising feeders to the railway lines, but also 
to provide great arteries of inter-American 
communication for motor transport. On the 
wall of my office hangs a map showing pro- 
posed highways connecting the principal 
points of our two continents. 

I am asking the United States Congress 
to authorize sending engineering advisers, 
the same as we send military and naval ad- 
visers, when requested by other countries, 
to assist in road building. These gratifying 
changes are about to be supplemented by the 
establishment of aviation routes, primarily 
for the transportation of mails, which will 
afford to our republics a channel of inter- 
change which will find its ultimate expres- 
sion in closer cultural and commercial ties 
and in better mutual comprehension. Our 
Congress also has under consideration pro- 
posals for supporting such air routes. Citi- 
zens of the United States are considering 
installing them. 

Private organizations of a civic, cultural, 
and educational character also have a great 
opportunity to help in the development of a 
closer understanding amongst the nations of 
America. The fine co-operation of the Red 
Cross Societies of the American continents 
is an outstanding instance of the field for 
service open to the civic and philanthropic 
organizations of this hemisphere. 

In the domain of commercial relations, the 
last few years have witnessed an extraor- 
dinary strengthening of the economic ties 
binding together our republics. In both agri- 
cultural and industrial production the coun- 
tries of America are now complementing one 
another to an unusual degree, resulting in an 
increasing exchange of commodities. Fur- 
thermore, recent years have witnessed a 




most gratifying rise in the standards of liv- 
ing of tlie wage-earners througtiout tlie 
Americas. Tliey enjoy a greater productive 
and earning capacity, with a consequent 
increase in their purchasing power, which 
has been reflected in the growing volume 
of inter-American commerce, destined to be- 
come more and more important as it com- 
bines a scientific utilization of natural re- 
sources with an increasing economic power 
of the masses of the people. The greater a 
nation becomes in wealth and production, the 
more it has for the service of its neighbors, 
the larger its markets for the goods of others. 
The operation of natural forces, supple- 
mented by the conscious purpose of the gov- 
ernments and peoples of the Americas, has 
increased their mutual interest in each other 
and strengthened the commercial ties among 

In this work of inter-American co-opera- 
tion, an important part has been played by 
the Pan American Union. It stands as the 
permanent organ of these conferences. This 
international organization has labored im- 
ceasingly to give effect to the treaties and 
resolutions adopted by the successive con- 
ferences. Its scope of usefulness is con- 
stantly being enlarged and its ability to 
serve the American republics is strengthened 
with each year that passes. 

In the area of political relations the re- 
sults have been no less gratifying and even 
more significant. It is almost impossible 
fully to appreciate the remarkable record 
achieved by the republics of America in the 
settlement of the differences that have arisen 
among them. Because of ill-defined bound- 
aries of the sparsely settled political sub- 
divisions of the old Spanish colonial em- 
pire the independent States of America 
carved out of it fell heir to a large number 
of territorial disputes, which in many cases 
were of an exceedingly delicate and difficult 
nature. It is a tribute to the spirit of good 
will and mutual accommodation which has 
dominated the relations among the nations of 
of the Western World that most of these 
disputes have been settled by the orderly 
process of negotiation, mediation, and arbi- 
tration. The adjustment of international 
differences on the American continents has 
happily advanced to a stage at which but 
few questions remain unsolved. This ex- 
traordinary record of achievement places 
heavy responsibility upon the present gener- 

ation to advance the great work that has 
been so auspiciously begun. 

It is a high example that we have set 
for the world in resolving international dif- 
ferences without resort to force. If these 
conferences mean anything, they mean the 
bringing of all our people more definitely 
and more comi)letely under the reign of law. 
After all, it is in that direction that we must 
look with the greatest assurance for human 
progress. We can make no advance in the 
realm of economics, we can do nothing for 
education, we can accomplish but little, even 
in the sphere of religion, until human affairs 
are brought within the orderly rule of law. 
The surest refuge of the weak and the op- 
pressed is in the law. It is pre-eminently 
the shield of small nations. This is neces- 
sarily a long, laborious process, which must 
broaden out from precedent to precedent, 
from the general acceptance of principle to 
principle. New activities require new laws. 
The rules for the governing of aviation are 
only beginning to be considered. We shall 
make more progress in the end if we proceed 
with deliberation. No doubt you will find in 
your discussions many principles that you are 
ready to announce as sound and settled rules 
of action. But there are certain to be other 
questions concerning which it is not possible 
at the present time to lay down a specific 
rule of law. This need not discourage any- 
one. It is rather the most conclusive evi- 
dence that the results which have been se- 
cured are not of a temporary and ill-con- 
sidered nature, but a mature statement of 
sound and conclusive principles. 

The foimders of our republic sought no 
peculiar preferment for themselves. That 
same disinterested spirit which has animated 
the conduct of our past conferences has given 
the American family of nations a high place 
in the opinion of the world. Our republics 
seek no special privileges for themselves, 
nor are they moved by any of those pur- 
poses of domination and restraints upon 
liberty of action which in other times and 
places have been fatal to peace and progress. 
In the international system which you repre- 
sent the rights of each nation carry with 
them corresponding obligations, defined by 
laws which we recognize as binding upon 
all of us. It is through the careful observ- 
ance of those laws which define our rights 
and impose our duties that international co- 
operation is possible. This lays on us all a 




continental responsibility which none of us 
wish to avoid and the fulfillment of which 
is one of the most important guaranties of 
international friendship. 

While the law is necessary for the proper 
guidance of human action, and will always 
remain the source of freedom and liberty 
and the ultimate guaranty of all our rights, 
there is another element in our experience 
which must always be taken into considera- 
tion. We read that "the letter killeth, but 
the spirit giveth life." Oftentimes in our 
international relationship we shall have to 
look to the spirit rather than to the letter 
of the law. We shall have to realize that 
the highest law is consideration, co-opera- 
tion, friendship, and charity. Without the 
application of these there can be no peace 
and no progress, no liberty and no republic. 
These are the attributes that raise human 
relationships out of the realm of the me- 
chanical, above the realm of animal exist- 
ence, into the loftier sphere that borders on 
the Divine. If we are to experience a new 
era in our affairs, it will be because the 
world recognizes and lives in accordance 
with this spirit. Its most complete expres- 
sion is the Golden Rule. 

The light which Columbus followed has not 
failed. The courage that carried him on still 
lives. They are the heritage of the people 
of Bolivar and of Washington. We must lay 
our voyage of exploration toward complete 
understanding and friendship. Having taken 
that course, we must not be turned aside 
by the fears of the timid, the counsels of 
the ignorant, or the designs of the malev- 
olent. With law and charity as our guides, 
with that ancient faith which is only 
strengthened when it requires sacrifices, we 
shall anchor at last in the harbor of justice 
and truth. The same Pilot which stood by 
the side of the Great Discoverer, and the 
same Wisdom which instructed the founding 
fathers of our republics will continue to 
abide with us. 


The text of President Machado's speech, 
made in welcoming President C!oolidge and 
the Pan-American delegates January 16, fol- 

Intense is our joy and complete our faith 
in the future destinies of our hemisphere 

when, gazing over this hall, adding brilliancy 
to this transcendental occasion, we behold 
the illustrious person of His Excellency Cal- 
vin Coolidge, Chief Executive of the greatest 
of all democracies, head of the great people 
whom Cuba had the honor of seeing at her 
side in her bloody struggle for independence, 
which she enjoys without limitation, as stated 
in the joint resolution of April 20, 1898, hon- 
orably applied and inspired by the same 
ideals set forth in the ever-famous Declara- 
tion of Independence of North America, lib- 
erty's greatest monument and the gospel of 
the rights of men and countries; and the 
select group of distinguished persons who 
constitute the delegations of the nations of 
America, which, throughout a century, have 
contributed with intense activity to the wel- 
fare of the world and to the great progress 
of its latest historical period. 

I offer to all of you the effusive greetings 
of the people of Cuba, whom I have the 
honor of representing on this solemn occa- 
sion ; to your peoples I express fervent wishes 
for their prosperity and greatness, and to the 
chiefs of State the prophecy that, as a prod- 
uct of this new gathering of all Americans, 
we may complete, during their incumben- 
cies, that which constitutes our common as- 
piration, the rule of peace and justice. 

The representatives of the American re- 
publics gather once more with the practical 
purpose of the consolidation of a mutual, 
beneficial and positive brotherhood, both in 
spirit and in interest. The International 
American Conference, initiated at Washing- 
ton thirty-nine years ago, and continued at 
Mexico, Rio de Janeiro, Buenos Aires, and 
Santiago, Chile, again meets to toil for the 
welfare and glory of this hemisphere, root 
of a new humanity and crucible of a new 

Voices Pride in Gathering 

Cuba is proud of your presence in her capi- 
tal for the celebration of such an extraor- 
dinary event. Regarding myself, I have 
never before felt as much pleasure as I do 
in these solemn moments in which I behold 
my country as the scene of an assembly that, 
animated by the most serene conciliatory 
spirit, directs its efforts toward the approxi- 
mation, development, and strengthening of 
the spiritual and material bonds between 
States that have been destined for fraternal 
love by geography and history. 




Pan-Americanism is a constructive work 
that does not imply antagonisms, but, on the 
contrary, co-operates for imiversal peace, for 
a better understanding among all peoples, 
toward the spiritual and moral unity of the 
nations of the world. It is something that, 
if in any manner it wishes to signify itself, 
it is in the desire of being placed at the 
front, bearing in mind that in international 
life greatness should not be judged by stand- 
ards inspired by admiration for brute force, 
but by the efforts of each nation within the 
scope of its civilization. 

Pan-Americanism is not merely the result 
of civilization, treaties, or noble institutions ; 
it is also, and primarily, public spirit, the 
will of the people and collective ideals. 

This public spirit, this will and these 
ideals, must be molded upon the progress 
made in individual fields, with due regard 
for the fact that a victim deserves respect 
and an aggressor condemnation ; it must be 
molded upon regard and affection, the coun- 
try that in constant labor carries its valu- 
able contribution toward collective well- 
being; and upon admiration, the State that 
places at the service of the common cause 
of progress its daily efforts, civil activity, 
hopes and aspirations. The great principle 
of co-operation must substitute the idea of 
separation of interests. Pan-Americanism 
is the synthesis of all principles of good that 
rise from the lives of the individuals to that 
of the State. 

Sees Union and Freedom 

It is not my purpose to suggest rules of 
conduct to such an illustrious assembly, but, 
if I am permitted to express the sentiments 
of my people, I will say to you that Cuba, 
one of the last republics to join this family 
of nations, aspires, with the faith of a novice, 
to see this hemisphere as the exponent of 
the most sincere cordiality, of the firmest 
union; to see the nations here represented, 
although politically separated, united in the 
common name of America, some refusing to 
allow their control by unjustified prejudices 
that may reveal impotence, and others any 
demonstration that might result in an in- 
voluntary threat. 

I will say that we Cubans can feel the 
magnificent effect of our common traditions 
and see with clear vision the great enterprise 
that the future expects from our countries 

and our men, while maintaining our love 
for the countries of our respective births and 
paying them due homage, for which no sac- 
rifice is excessive, no matter how great it 
may be. 

The constitution of the Pan American 
Union upon a judicial foundation ; the codi- 
fication of the generally accepted principles 
of international law ; the consideration of 
the results of the technical conferences held 
with specific aims ; of communications, cus- 
toms, sanitation, etc., and the promotion of 
more profitable economic relations, constitute 
a beautiful program that may meet the as- 
pirations of our peoples. 

The work outlined will not be diflicult if 
we direct our thoughts toward good, with the 
determination of being useful to humanity 
and to ourselves. 

No person nor anything can now oppose 
the tide that impels the destinies of the 
Western Hemisphere toward its definite 
brotherhood under the shelter of the judicial 
standards that are indispensable for the 
maintenance of peace. If we reach that end 
in the Sixth International American Con- 
ference, and a similar aim prevails in the 
minds and souls of all here present, this 
alone will be sufficient to mark the meeting 
of your assembly at Havana as a brilliant 
milestone in the annals of modem interna- 
tional life. 

Peace and Justice the Aim 

All of you feel the desire to find basic 
formulas that will harmonize the common 
interests of all Americans : peace through 
the absolute prei>onderance of justice, with- 
out which happiness is not possible, neither 
among individuals nor among nations ; jus- 
tice secured upon adequate resolutions freely 
accepted by all nations, without discrimina- 

But I have not come here to state axioms 
already accepted by all. It is sufficient for 
me to affirm that this nation has directed 
and directs all her energies toward the fruit- 
ful labors of peace, order, liberty, and prog- 
ress, upon which her glory rests ; and if 
success has crowned her efforts, it is due to 
that spirit of admiration that she had at 
birth for all lands of America and for those 
nations that preceded her in the conquest of 
independence, which constitutes the supreme 
good of all coimtries. A free nation, she 




today offers you her hospitality and in her 
name I say to you that in her bosom you will 
find the warmth of the hearth, the shelter of 
the ally, and the love of the fellow-citizen. 

Delegates, receive my welcome, my 
prophecy of success, and my encouragement 
for victory. 

News in Brief 

The Grand Council of the Fascisti, at 
Mussolini's behest, have ruled that suffrage 
shall not be universal in Italy. Only those 
whom Fascists judge to be active contributors 
to the welfare of the nation shall vote. Depu- 
ties are to be reduced from 560 to 400 in num- 
ber. The new system is a sort of oligarchy, 
with the Grand Council holding all the power. 
Mussolini himself nominates the Grand Coun- 
cil. It is backed by secret police, press cen- 
sorship, and denial of free speech and as- 

Japan's 60 million people subsist on only 
a quarter of an acre of crops per person. 
Intensive agriculture and efficient utilization 
of land make this remarkable fact possible. 

Commissions feom Uruguay and Bolivia 
have been meeting in Buenos Aires to settle 
a boundary dispute. Argentina offered her 
good offices, but did not preside. Later she 
offered her services as arbitrator. 

New Zeiaxand Maori are many of them 
prominent in the political and cultural life of 
the country. A member of the race has been 
acting Prime Minister lately. Others are in 
Parliament and eminent in science and edu- 

Colombia and Nicaragua some weeks ago 
appointed commissioners to formulate a plan 
for the settlement of an old dispute over the 
possession of islands of the St. Andrews 
archipelago, in the Caribbean. 

The Tacna-Arica Boundary Commission 
resumed its deliberations November 29th. 

Airplane service for passengers and mail, 
to ply between the Canal Zone and Colombian 
ports, has been inaugurated by a Colombian 

Air passengers between Key West and 
Havana were carried for the first time, on 
the mail planes, November 15. Regular pas- 
senger service opened on January 1. 

The French Chamber of Deputies, on the 
first day of the new session, November 2, 
voted, by a majority of 43, to liberate from 
prison during the time Parliament is sitting, 
four Communist deputies. The four were 
imprisoned during the summer for anti- 
militarist propaganda. 

The Abyssinian Government has negoti- 
ated a contract with a firm of American en- 
gineers for the construction of a dam across 
the Blue Nile near Lake Tsana. The irriga- 
tion of tremendous desert tracts is the pur- 
pose of the dam. The expected substantia] 
profits from the sale of water which will ac- 
crue to the Abyssinian Government will en- 
able the reigning regent to embark on a 
scheme of education, health, and sanitation 
for the betterment of the country. 

The International Associations Against 
Communism met in a congress at The Hague 
November 9-12. Jurists from various Euro- 
pean countries attended the meetings for the 
discussion of a draft code containing legal 
measures against Communism. The Burgo- 
master of The Hague attended the opening 
session. The press was excluded from the 

Two native African women, teachers from 
South Africa, have come to the United States 
to study educational systems here. They hope 
to take home new ideas for the advancement 
in education of African women. They have 
come to the conclusion that that country can- 
not go forward while at least half of the 
population remains ignorant and untrained. 

Requests for Douglas fir seeds have come 
from Australia, New Zealand, Germany, 
France and Czechoslovakia for forest plant- 
ing. This fir is the principal timber crop of 
the Pacific coast, and some 3,000 bushels of 
cones have been secured by the forestry de- 
partment of the Long-Bell Lumber Co., from 
which seeds will be extracted and shipped 

Leon Trotzky left Moscow January 16 
to begin a sentence of banishment in Vierny, 
Russian Turkestan. Other leaders of the 
opposition Communists have been either ban- 



F eh mart/ 

Ished or given party posts in remote spots 
of Russia. 

The Soviet Govebnment has appointed M. 
Tboyanovsky, an expert on foreign trade, 
ambassador to Japan to succeed M. Dovga- 
levsky, lately transferred to Paris. 

The Third Conference on the Cause and 
Cure of War, held in Washington January 
15-19, adopted a resolution approving of 
Secretary Kellogg's proposal for a "multi- 
lateral treaty with France, Great Britain, 
Japan, Germany, and Italy and other like- 
minded nations for the renunciation of war 
as an instrument of national policy." 

Esperanto is to be the only language 
used at the next conference of the "New Edu- 
cation," which will be held in Denmark in 
1929. The same arrangement is announced 
for the Fellowship of Reconciliation Con- 
ference, to be held at The Hague next sum- 

The German Reichstag has ratified 
within a month the international convention 
relative to health insurance of workmen 
and employees in trade and commerce; also 
of agricultural workers. 

Central Europe and the Balkans, con- 
sidered in terms of economics, are said, by a 
correspondent of the New York Times, to 
have completed the most successful year since 
the war. Unemployment has decreased an 
average of 20 per cent, and all countries ex- 
cept Rumania have Improved in this respect. 
Commerce is improving, especially in Czecho- 
slovakia, and slightly even in Bulgaria, 
Greece, and Albania. 

The American Historical Association 
passed resolutions in its conference in Wash- 
ington in January stating, "Genuine and in- 
telligent patriotism, no less than the require- 
ments of honesty and sound scholarship, de- 
mand that text-book writers and teachers 
should strive to present a truthful picture 
of the past and present, with due regard to 
the different purposes and possibilities of 
elementary, secondary, and advanced instruc- 


recently been settled between South Ameri- 

can republics through the good offices of the 
United States. The boundary line between 
Peru and Columbia was in dispute, and, 
though settled by treaty in 1922, the terms 
were protested by Brazil. The matter has 
now been finally and satisfactorily settled. 

A NEW passenger liner SERVICE Under the 
American flag is announced soon to be in- 
augurated. Four-day steamers are promised, 
which leave each side of the Atlantic every 
other day. 

The proposed highway from Canada to 
Chile was lauded at the American Road- 
builders Association in Cleveland in Jan- 
uary as one of the most promising steps to- 
ward international amity. 

Canada's success in establishing diplo- 
matic relations at Washington has decided 
the Dominion Government to appoint a min- 
ister plenipotentiary to France, it is officially 
announced. Phillip Roy, the present high 
commissioner at Paris, will be appointed to 
the post, while the French Government will 
make Baron VitroUes, Consul General for 
France, the first Minister to Canada. 

An advisory committee, to work with the 
committee of experts on the codification of 
international law set up two years ago by 
the League of Nations, met at the Harvard 
Law School recently. 

The Turkish Government last spring 
ordered all of the 2,879 remaining Russian 
refugees to evacuate Constantinople, unless 
they obtain citizenship by February 6, 1928. 
Only a few technicians have been able to 
obtain citizenship, and since over five hun- 
dred of the Russians there are young or in- 
firm the problem of removing them is diffi- 
cult. The Turkish Government will extend 
the time if one-half of the number is trans- 
ported on the specified date. The High Com- 
mission of the League with the Labor Office 
plan to send one-half the number to be settled 
in South America; the others to islands in 
the Mediterranean. At least $100,000 of the 
$230,000 needed for this work is to be raised 
in America. 




Norway and Sweden are the first coun- 
tries to respond to the request of the League 
of Nations that the nations draft model 
treaties of conciliation and arbitration. 

The China Institute in America has re- 
cently published a bulletin listing 568 theses 
and iiissertations written by Chinese students 
in the United States since 1902. Of these 
essays 152 deal with China and her problems. 
The statistics come from 32 colleges and uni- 
versities, and, while not complete, the list is 
an interesting record of much of the work of 
Chinese youth in this country. 

The present arbitration treaty of the 
United States with France expires in Feb- 
ruary, 1928 ; that with Great Britain in June, 

Six Afghan youths of good family, who 
are later to become officers in the police force 
which King AmanuUa is building up, went 
to England the latter part of December. 
After learning English in private families, 
they are to study the British provincial and 
metropolitan police service. Others will be 
sent later. The king hopes by this means to 
pacify Afghanistan, so that all races may 
travel there in safety, railroads may safely 
be built and operated, and his country may 
enter the family of nations. 

It has been announced by the President 
of Yeuching University, which is in Peking, 
China, that an institute of Chinese studies 
will be established in both Yenching and 
Harvard universities, where advanced stu- 
dents of Orient and Occident may carry on 
research after crossing the seas. 

A conference of Yugoslavia, Poland, Ru- 
mania, perhaps Hungary and Bulgaria, is 
probable in the near future, to study the best 
method of maintaining international com- 
merce in the Greek port of Saloniki. 

The South Ambkican Educational Ad- 
vance has announced a renewal of its cam- 
paign for funds with which to foster cultural 
understanding between North and South 
America. Among its objects is the inter- 
change of specialists and lectures and the dis- 
semination of the best literature in both 
Spanish and English. 

The Polish Government is said to have 
sent a special courier to Lithuania to suggest 
resumption of negotiations. As topics for 
the initial discussions, the note suggests the 
regulation of communication between the two 
countries along the border and the resump- 
tion of postal, telegraphic, and railway com- 

Plans for a building for the League of 
Nations have been approved by the commit- 
tee of judges. The building, the plan for 
which was submitted by a Frenchman, is 
severely classical in design. 

The cost of the World War to the United 
States is estimated by Secretary Mellon to 
be $35,119,622,144. 


The Outlawry of War: A Constructive 
Policy for World Peace. By Charles 
Clayton Morrison. Pp. 319. Willett, Clark 
& Colby, Chicago, 1927. Price, $3.00. 

Here is a book which is welcome to the 
Advocate of Peace. It speaks a clear, 
courageous word, and one of hope, to an 
America of bitter disillusionment. The rank 
and file in this country accepted our part 
in the World War only as a necessity, be- 
cause we had ideals of righteousness — in- 
deed, because we hoped we might advance 
the peace of justice. Results have not proven 

The many developments in Europe during 
and since the peace conference at Paris, the 
revelations of secret documents and treaties, 
the violent opposition of interests, the side- 
stepping by governments of real issues — 
all contribute to the havoc of soul which is 
bound to accompany any sudden and pro- 
found disillusionment. 

Here is a book, however, which in its 
main propositions is thoroughly constructive. 
Indeed, its line of argument is buttressed 
throughout with interpretations of events 
which are as true as they are frequently 
misunderstood. It is clear thinking of this 




sort which will, if anything can, put war 
out of commission as a human institution. 

Dr. Morrison speaks as an American, be- 
lieving in his country's institutions ; he gives 
full credit to America's historic achievement 
in abolishing war between soverign States ; 
he thinks that America was quite sound in de- 
ciding to "have no part in the structural com- 
mitments with which the League is bound" ; 
he scouts the idea of "enforcing" peace or 
of any military sanctions for international 
treaties. He treats all these themes with 
logical incisiveness. 

Disarmament he places in its place, as a 
result of and not a prelude to security, as 
secured by the abolition of war. He aims 
surely and consistently, as the Advocate of 
Peace has for one hundred years striven to 
do, at War as an institution. 

It is of interest, also, to note that the 
author sees that the Geneva Protocol of 1924 
rested solidly on military force, as do the 
Locarno Treaties. Therefore he smiles at 
the "Europeanized" mentality of Professor 
Shotwell, who names his own draft treaty, 
which entirely omits the military guarantee, 
as "An American Locarno." The sentiment 
of former attachment to a European back- 
ground, he says, "must express itself some- 
how, if only in the choice of a nickname." 

The "Afterword," by John Dewey, does 
not, in the reviewer's opinion, strengthen 
the book. The word internationalism, which 
he uses pretty freely, is full of dynamite 
unless defined so that it allows for the sur- 
vival of nations. The possible idea of a 
superstate is a shadow which it seems un- 
necessary to cast upon Dr. Morrison's very 
sane and pragmatic book. 

The Revolt of Asia. By Upton Close. Pp. 

325. G. P. Putnam's Sons, New York, 1927. 

As an explorer, journalist, or secret serv- 
ice man, Josef Washington Hall, whose pen 
name is Upton Close, spent ten adventurous 
years in the Orient. He claims to be a re- 
porter rather than a prophet. For this task 
his thorough inside knowledge of tendencies 
in China, India, and Japan are invaluable. 
But after he has translated into western lan- 
guage the recent thought of the East it re- 
quires no prophet to convince us that we 
have come to the end of the white man's 
dominance in Asia. 

"We have come," says Mr. Hall, "to the be- 
ginning of the white and colored man's joint 

world, when each shall have control in his 
own house and a proportionate say in the 
general convocation of humanity." 

He quotes Philip Guedalla on China, that 
ancient race which exasperates England "be- 
cause the inhabitants of China are Chinese — 
a singular fact which has so often baffled 
European statesmanship." 

There are interesting outlines of the differ- 
ent ways in which Chinese, Japanese, and 
Indians react to the western education which 
has been so largely given to their youth ; but 
all point to the necessary recognition of the 
differences between East and West. And the 
West needs certain qualities which are native 
to the East. Hence co-operation must replace 
the "white push." 

One of the most revealing chapters is that 
on Russia in the revolt. Of even more im- 
portance in understanding the East is the 
discussion with Ghandi at his spinning wheel. 

The book is well printed, unburdened with 
notes, rapid to read, and should be of use in 
popular education toward a spirit of toler- 
ance as opposed to force. 

An Introduction to the Study of the 
American Constitution. By Charles E. 
Martin, Ph. D. Pp. 426 and index. Oxford 
University Press, American Branch, New 
York, 1927. Price, $3. 

"Ours is a government of laws, but a gov- 
ernment by men," says Professor Martin in 
the preface to this book. The Constitution — 
that is to say, is a framework or skeleton 
giving form and substance to the living or- 
ganism it supports; but without human per- 
sonalities the Constitution is lifeless. 

Dr. Martin does not close his eyes to the 
defects in our government, nor in the Consti- 
tution which systematizes it. Yet the Consti- 
tution is so excellent ; it seems to be the best 
thing so far devised for its purpose, that he 
wishes to meet recent criticism with a rea- 
soned study of it. Criticism is only helpful 
if it is informed and constructive. Hence 
this careful analysis of the growth of the 
constitutional system of government and of 
the ideals, national and international, upon 
which it is based. Then the development of 
these ideals, especially in the Constitution of 
the United States. 

The work is carried out logically and thor- 
oughly, though in fairly brief manner. Many 
illustrations are, naturally, merely summa- 
rized. Controversial questions, particularly. 




are analyzed in an unbiassed way. Discus- 
sions and decisions as to tlie proposed Cliild 
Labor Amendment, the Proliibition Amend- 
ment, and other constitutional questions are 
outlined as briefly and clearly as possible. 

The appendix, however, is of more than 
passing importance. It contains more valu- 
able documents relative to our constitutional 
history than are to be found in other books of 
this kind. The Constitution itself precedes 
the body of the book. The appendix has, 
however, besides the usual Declaration of In- 
dependence, Articles of Confederation, May- 
flower Compact, the Virginia Bill of Rights, 
the Virginia Statute of Religious Liberty, and 
the Virginia Plan for the Constitution ; also 
the New Jersey Plan, Pinckney's and Hamil- 
ton's. There are, too, half a dozen selections 
from the Federalist and brief biographical 
notes on persons prominent in our constitu- 
tional and judicial history. Finally, there are 
lists of acts of Congress which have been de- 
clared unconstitutional, and declarations of 
persons and parties regarding the Constitu- 
tion and the Supreme Court during the presi- 
dential campaign of 1924. 

The South Africans. By Sarah Gertrude 
Millin. Pp. 287. Boni & Liveright, New 
York, 1927. Price, $3.50. 

"The past is the present. But the present 
is the future." Thus Mrs. Millin, the novelist, 
speaks in her essay on the Kaffir. But it 
might easily be taken for the motive of this 
whole book of essays. In order to guess of 
the future of South Africa, one must read, 
as one does here, of its past and hear an 
estimate of its present. 

Mrs. Millin does all this for us with thor- 
ough understanding and courageous honesty. 
Whites and blacks, Dutch and English, are 
impartially delineated. Moreover, the whole 
manner of telling is delightful. Seeing with 
imagination, she writes with facile touch, yet 
with authority. One's attention is often 
arrested, too, by a whimsical turn of phrase 
or a flash of Attic wit. Yet she leaves no 
uncertainty as to the great problem of South 
Africa, which is the terms of future adjust- 
ment between the negroes and the whites. 
The problem is similar to, but not identical 
with, our own negro problem in the United 

The book is as absorbing as a novel and 
deeply informing. There is no prophecy ex- 
cept as a clear stating of a problem helps in 

its solution. And that racial problem must 
be understood, not only by South Africans, 
but somewhat by the rest of the world, if it 
is to be harmoniously solved. 

The Case of the German South Tyrol 
Against Italy. By C. H. Herford. Pp. 96. 
George Allen «& Unwin, London, 1927. 

The documents here translated and edited 
were originally published by a committee of 
citizens of the South Tyrol. The editor is an 
English professor and reviewer of note, who 
has published many books of his own, espe- 
cially on Shakespeare, and also on the great 
poets of Germany and Italy. 

This book shows, by documents and notes, 
how the population of the South Tyrol pro- 
tested from the first against consolidation 
with Italy without a plebiscite. It shows the 
many restrictions which Fascist Italy has 
imposed on the German-speaking people of 
this region. These laws are summarized in 
chapter xxil. They include laws regulating^ 
and changing to Italian the names of places 
and families which have always heretofore 
been German. As though to add insult to 
injury, the translation from German to 
Italian has often been quite absurd and 
erroneous. There are laws limiting the rights- 
of property, changing public Inscriptions, 
prohibiting pictures of national heroes, and, 
worse than all, the suppression of the native- 
language press, the German language In 
schools and the prohibition of all private 
instruction in any language. 

Since German-speaking people have inhab- 
ited this region for about thirteen hundred 
years, according to Professor Herford, and 
are the bulk of the population, these regula- 
tions create intolerable hardships. He sug- 
gests, as a possible compromise and a bit of 
far-seeing statesmanship, the creation of a 
university, perhaps at Bozen, as a mediating 
center, with chairs of both German and 
Italian cultures. Methods of cooperation in- 
stead of oppression would, he thinks, bridge 
over this difficult period of adjustment. 

Occupied Haiti. Edited by Emily Oreene 
Batch. Pp. 180 and index. Writers' Pub- 
lishing Co., New York, 1927. 

This represents the results of a study of 
Haiti in relation to the American occupation. 
The committee was organized by the United 
States section of the Women's International 




League for Peace and Freedom. The find- 
ings of this committee, given here, conclude 
in a series of recommendations along the gen- 
eral lines which one would expect from the 
personnel of the committee. Briefly stated, 
they advise an ultimate policy of leaving 
Haiti to her own people, with an interim 
policy of education, Haitian responsibility, 
and neutralization. 

The chapters, written by the different mem- 
bers of the committee, are interesting and 
quite temperate. All admit that the time for 
study was too brief to be adequate and some 
of the topics too technical for final opinions. 
The investigators hope, however, for a fur- 
ther and official study to be inaugurated in 
Haiti. The book is at least informational 
and thus worth reading. 

SiLVEB Cities of Yucatan. By Oregory Ma- 
son. Pp. 340. Putnam, New York, 1927. 
Price, $3,50. 

The splendid early civilization attained by 
the Maya Indians of the first empire in 
Mexico has been fairly well guessed from its 
various ruins. Then came the conquests by 
that great emperor of the Toltecs, Quetzal- 
coatl. With an advanced philosophy of life 
and ideals of statehood, the conqueror was 
also great as a scientist, an architect, and a 
priest. He lived in the twelfth century. Be- 
fore King John of Britain granted the Magna 
Charta to his barons, this Toltec emperor had 
established a beneficent system of local self- 
government among his conquered peoples. 
The era following him, up to the Spanish 
conquest, in the early sixteenth century, has 
not yet been fully read. There are many un- 
explained mysteries, and so far no Maya 
Rosetta Stone has been found to aid in de- 
ciphering the records. Furthermore, what 
monuments there are have been largely inac- 
cessible, or even unknown, because of the 
jealousy of their present guardians, the mod- 
ern Yucatan Indians. 

This book tells of the Mason-Spinden Expe- 
dition, which visited Yucatan in 1926. Dr. 
Spinden is one of the leading authorities on 
Maya archeology. Perhaps for that reason 
Mr. Mason, no mean archeologist himself, 
keeps his account largely to the cruise itself 
and adventures of the men who went. He 
describes the discoveries, to be sure, but with 
a sort of holiday enthusiasm, as if leaving 

the placing of things in their setting to an- 
other member of the expedition. It was a 
journey taken in strange conveyances, along 
a dangerous, practically uncharted coast 
But what are charts to an intuitional captain, 
whose compass is incidentally discovered one 
day, hidden away in the engine-room? 

The story is a gay one, spiced with thrills, 
a popular book that probably serves its pur- 
pose, because he who runs not only may 
read, but wishes to know more. And that 
may be the legitimate object of the book. 

The Land of Magellan. By W. 8. Barclay, 
F. R. G. 8. Pp. 236, index, and maps. 
Brentano, New York, 1927. 

The story of the archipelago stretching 
around Cape Horn has a meaning for several 
reasons. Not only is the history of naviga- 
tion in its waters a long and thrilling one, 
but the region itself has strategic importance 
for the present day. Setting aside the com- 
parative ease with which the straits could be 
blockaded, it is the nearest habitable laud to 
that vast subcontinent newly discovered about 
the South Pole. It is, too, a spot of real im- 
portance in meteorological observations, af- 
fecting the forecast of crop conditions in 
South America, and an excellent vantage 
ground for charting the ocean bottom, ocean 
and air currents in the extreme south. Fur- 
ther than that, much of the land in the archi- 
pelago is entirely habitable, and with im- 
proved communications might easily be ex- 
ploited. The inner F^egan country, along its 
tortuous water channels and seas, is a land of 
rare beauty, which will one day be accessible 
to tourists. All this and much more one 
learns from this delightful and carefully 
documented book. 

Beginning with the little squadron of Ma- 
gellan, which started on its memorable voy- 
age in 1519, the author follows the tale for 
the succeeding four centuries. Hardship, 
genius, success, disaster, heroism, and vil- 
lainy, all have a place in the long story. Fi- 
nally, the lands as they appear to the modern 
traveler close the narrative. The story has 
never been so fully and connectedly told in 
English before. It should be read as a pleas- 
ant preliminary to further understanding of 
the Antarctic ventures which are already 
under way. 







Plowshares in the Making 

from Chttstian Seitnct Monitor 


March, 1928 

American Peace Society 

Its Beginnings 

At a meeting of the Maine Peace Society at Minot, Febru- 
ary 10, 1826, a motion was carried to form a national peace 
society. Minot was the home of William Ladd. The first 
constitution for a national peace society was drawn by this 
illustrious man, at the time corresponding secretary of the 
Massachusetts Peace Society. The constitution was pro- 
visionally adopted, with alterations, February 18, 1828; but 
the society was finally and officially organized, through the 
influence of Mr. Ladd and with the aid of David Low Dodge, 
in New York City, May 8, 1828. Mr. Dodge wrote, in the 
minutes of the New York Peace Society: "The New York 
Peace Society resolved to be merged in the American Peace 
Society . . . which, in fact, was a dissolution of the old 
New York Peace Society, formed 16 August, 1815, and the 
American, May, 1828, was substituted in its place." 

Its Purpose 

The purpose of the American Peace Society shall be to 
promote permanent international peace through justice; and 
to advance in every proper way the general use of concilia- 
tion, arbitration, judicial methods, and other peaceful means 
of avoiding and adjusting differences among nations, to the 
end that right shall rule might in a law-governed world. 

— Constitution of the 
American Peace Society 
Article 11. 


Arthur Deeein Call, Editor 

Leo Pasvolsky, Associate Editor 

Published since 1834 by 


Founded 1828 from Societies some of whlcli liegan in 1815. 

Suite 612-614 Colorado Building, Washington, D. C. 

(Cable address, "Ampax, Wasliington.") 


Sent free to all members of the American Peace Society. Separate subscription 
price, $3.00 a year. Single copies, 30 cents each. 

Entered as second-class matter. June 1, 1911, at the Post-Offlce at Washington, 
D. C, under the Act of July 16, 1894. Acceptance for mailing at special rate of postage 
provided for in Section 1103, Act of October 3, 1917 ; authorized August 10, 1918. 

It being impracticable to express in these columns the divergent views of 
the thousands of members of the American Peace Society, full responsibility 
for the utterances of this magazine is assumed by the Editor. 


Publications of the American Peace Society 131-132 


Why our Conference in Cleveland? — A Successful Congress — Re- 
grettable — Mr. Burton's Resolution — German Sense and Security — 
Catholic Association for International Peace — A Sample European 
Difficulty— Editorial Notes 133-148 

World Problems in REV^EW 

Sixth Pan American Conference — The Problem of Security — French 
Army Reform — E\iture of the German Reich — Trotsky's Exile to 
Siberia 149-160 

General Articles 

History of the Advocate of Peace 162 

By M. S. Call 
Should Any National Dispute be Reserved from Arbitration? 170 

By Jackson H. Ralston, Esq. 
International Relations 173 

By Mrs. Rufus C. Dawes 
Our Army 175 

By Honorable Ross A. Collins 
A Letter 179 

Prom "Bill" Adams 
Geneva and After 181 

By the Correspondent and Editor of the London Times 
The Trees that Died in the War (A Poem) 184 

By Angela Morgan 
Whereas (A Poem on the Centennial of the American Peace Society) . 187 

By Alice Lawry Gould 

International Documents 

Arbitration Treaty between the United States and France 185 

Anglo-Iraq Treaty 186 

News in Brief 188 

Book Reviews 190 

Vol. 90 March, 1928 No. 3 

■^ r 


David Jayne Hux 

Abthub Deerin Cau. 


Theodoee E. Burton 


Business Manager 
Lacet C Zapf 

Jackson H. Ralston 

George W. White 

Assistant Director, Bureau of Research, Chamber of Commerce of the United States 
Secretary, American Section, International Chamber of Commerce 


(Asterisk indicates member of Executive Committee) 


•Theodore E. Burton, President. Congressman 
from Ohio. President, American Group, Interparlia- 
mentary Union. Member House Committee on Foreign 
Affairs. Member United States Debt Funding Com- 

Philip Marshall Brown, Professor of Interna- 
tional Law, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jer- 

•Arthur Deerin Call, Secretary, and Editor of 
the Advocate of Peace. Executive Secretary, Amer- 
ican Group, Interparliamentary Union. 

P. P. Claxton, Superintendent of Schools, Tulsa, 
Oklahoma. Formerly United States Commissioner of 

John M. Crawford, President, Parkersburg Rig & 
Reel Company, Parkersburg, West Virginia. For 
manjr years a< Director of the Chamber of Commerce 
of the United States. 

Tyson S. Dinks, Attorney of Denver, Colorado. 

John J. Esch, Chairman, Interstate Commerce 
Commission. Formerly Member of Congress from 

IlARRr A. Garfield, President, Williams College, 
Williamstown, Mass. United States Fuel Adminis- 
trator during World War. 

•Thomas E. Green, Director, National Speakers' 
Bureau, American Red Cross. 

Dwight B. Heard, President, Dwight B. Heard 
Investment Company, Phoenix, Arizona. Director, 
Chamber of Commerce of the United States. 

•David Jaynb Hill, Washington, D. C. Formerly 
Assistant Secretary of State and Ambassador to 

Clarence H. Howard, President, Commonwealth 
Steel Company, St. Louis, Missouri. For many years 
a Director, Chamber of Commerce of the United States, 
and member of American Committee, International 
Chamber of Commerce. 

Charles L. Hyde, President, American Exchange 
Bank, Pierre, South Dakota. 

William Mather Lewis, President, Lafayette Col- 
lege, Baston, Pa. 

Felix M. McWhikter, President, Peoples State 
Bank, Indianapolis, Indiana. Director, Chamber of 
Commerce of the United States. 

B. T. Meredith, Des Moines, Iowa. Director, 
Chamber of Commerce of the United States. Member 
American Committee, International Chamber of Com- 
merce. Formerly Secretary of Agriculture. 

Prank W. Mondell, Washington, D. C. Formerly 
Congressman from Wyoming. 

•Walter A. Morgan, D. D., Postor, New First Con- 
gregational Church, Chicago, Illinois. 

•George M. Morris, Washington, D. C. Partner of 
the Chicago and New York law firm of Kix-Miller & 

•Henry C. Morris, Attorney of Chicago and Wash- 
ington, D. C. Formerly United States Consul. 

Edwin P. Morrow, Member. United States Board 
of Mediation, Washington, D. C. Formerly Governor 
of Kentucky. 

John M. Parker, formerly Governor of Louisiana, 
St. Francisville, La. 

Reginald H. 1'arsons, President, Parsons Invest- 
ment Company, Seattle, Washington. Member Amer- 
ican Committee, International Chamber of Commerce, 
and for many years member of the National Foreign 
Trade Council. 

Jackson H. Ralston, Attorney, Palo Alto, Califor- 

Arthur Ramsay, Southern Pines, North Carolina. 
Founder, Fairmont Seminary, Washington, D. C. 

Hiram W. Ricker, President, Poland Springs Com- 
pany, South Poland, Maine. 

•Theodore Stanfield, Peace Advocate and Author, 
New York City. Formerly Executive Manager, Amer- 
ican Metal Company. 

•.Tay T. Stocking, D. D., Pastor, Pilgrim Congre- 
gational Church, St. Louis. Mo. 

Silas II. Sthawn, Attorney of Chicago. Chairman 
of Board. Montgomery Ward Company. Director, In- 
ternational Chamber of Commerce. President, Amer- 
ican Bar Association. 

♦Henry W. Temple, Congressman from Pennsyl- 
vania. Member House Committee on Foreign Affairs. 

Robert E. Vin.son, President, Western Reserve 
University, Cleveland, Ohio. 

William Way, D. D., Rector, Grace Episcopal 
Church, Charleston, South Carolina. President of the 
New England Society of Charleston. 

Oscar Wells, President, First National Bank, Bir- 
mingham, Alabama. Formerly President, American 
Bankers Association. Member American Committee, 
International Chamber of Commerce. 

Frank White, Treasurer of the United States, 
Washington, D. C Formerly Governor of North 

•George W. White, Treasurer. President, National 
Metropolitan Bank, Washington, D. C. Treasurer 
American Automobile Association. 

William Alle.v White, Proprietor and Editor, 
Emporia Dally and Weekly Gazette, Emporia, Kans. 


Elmer Ellsworth Brown, Chancellor, New York 

W. H. P. Faunce, President, Brown University. 

William P. Qest. President, Fidelity Trust Com- 
pany, Philadelphia, Pa. 

CiiARLKs Cheney Hyde, Hamilton Fish Professor 
of International Law and Diplomacy, Columbia Uni- 
versity. Formerly Solicitor for Department of State. 
Charles F. Thwing, President Emeritus, 

George H. Jddd, President, Judd & Detweiler, Inc., 
Washington, D. C. 

Blihu Root, Attorney, New York City. Formerly 
Secretary of State, and for many years President of 
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 

.Tames Brown Scott, Secretary Carnegie End 
ment for International Peace, Washington, D. 
I'resldent. Institute of International Law. 
Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio. 



612-614 Colorado Building, Washington, D. G. 

The following pamphlets are available at the headquarters of the American Peace Society, the 
price quoted being for the cost of printing and postage only : 

ADVOCATE OF PEACE, Published Monthly Except September, $3.00 


Butler, Nicholas Murray : 

The International Mind 1912 $0.05 

Call, Arthur D. : 

Cumber and Entanglements 1917 .10 

Carnegie, Andrew : 

A Lea^e of Peace 1905 . 10 

Christ of the Andes (illustrated), 7th 

edition 1914 . 05 

Franklin on War and Peace .10 

Gladden, Washington : 

Is War a Moral Necessity? 1915 .05 

Morgan, Walter A. ; 

Great Preaching in England and 

America 1924 . 05 

Palace of Peace at The Hague (illus- 
trated) 1914 .OS 

Peace seals in six colors. Sheets of 12 .10 

12 sheets 1.00 

Stanfield, Theodore : 

The Divided States of Europe and 

The United States of America.. 1921 .10 

Tolstoi. Count Leon : 

The Beginning of the End 1898 

Bush-Brown, H. K. 

A Temple to Liberty 1926 

Military Training for Schoolboys : 

Symposium from educators 1916 

Taft, Donald R. 

History Text Books as Provoca- 
tives of War 1925 

Walsh, Rer. Walter : 

Moral Damage of War to the School 

Child 1911 

Oordt. Blenland v. : 

Children Bnildlng Peace Palace ; 
post-card (sepia) 

Cole, Evelyn Leeds : 

Hymn for Universal Peace. 

Call, Arthur D. : 

Federal Convention, May-Septem- 
ber. 1787. Published 1922, re- 


James Mndison, America's greatest 

constructive statesman 

The Will to End War 

Emerson, Ralnh Waldo : 

"War." Address before the Ameri- 
can Peace Society in 1838. Re- 

Estoumelle de Constant : 

The Limitation of Armaments (Re- 
port at Interparliamentary Union 

Meetint?, London) 

Hocking, Wm. E. 

Immannel Kant and International 


Kant. Immanuel : 

Perpetual Peace. First published 

in 1795. republished in 

Levermore, Charles H. : 

Synopsis of Plans for International 





















Beals, Charles E. : 

Benjamin F. Trueblood, Prophet of 

Hemmenway, John : 

William Ladd, The Apostle of 





Penn, William : Published. 

Peace of Europe. First published 

in 1693, republished in 1912 $0.10 

Scott, James Brown : 

The Development of Modern Di- 
plomacy 1921 

Trueblood, Benjamin F. : 

International Arbitration at the 

Opening of the 20th Century 

Trueblood, Lyra : 

18th of May, History of its Ob- 

Tryon, James L. : 

A Century of Anglo-American 

Peace 1914 

New England a Factor in the 

Peace Movement 1914 

Washington's Anti-Militarism 

Worcester, Noah : 

Solemn Review of the Custom of 
War. First published Christ- 
mas, 1814, republished in 1904 






Staub. Albert W. : 

David Low Dodge, a Peace Pioneer 

and his Descendants 1927 . 10 

Wehberg, Hans : 

James Brown Scott 1926 . 10 

Deforest, J. H. : 

Is Japan a Menace to the United 

States? 1908 .05 

Kawakami, Isamu : 

Disarmament, The Voice of the 

Japanese People 1921 . 10 

Tolstoi, Count Leon : 

letter on the Russo-Japanese War 1904 .10 

Call. Arthur D. : 

Three Facts in American Foreign 

Policy 1921 .05 

A Governed World 1921 . 05 

Hughes, Chnrles E. : 

The Development of International 

Law 1925 . 10 

Root. Elihu : 

"The Great War" and International 

Law 1921 .10 

See also Interparliamentary Union 
Scott. James Brown : 

Orgnnization of International Jus- 
tice 191T .10 

Government of Laws and not of 

Men 1926 . 15 

Published. • 
Should There be a Third Hague 

Conference ? 1925 . 10 

Snow, Alphens H. : 

International Reorganization 1917 .10 

International Legislation and Ad- 
ministration 1917 . 10 

League of Nations According to 

American Idea 1920 . 10 




Spears, Brig. -Gen. E. L. : Published. 

Demilitarized Zones and European 

Security 1925 $0. 10 

Stanfleld, Theodore : 

A Coercive League 1920 . 10 

Trueblood, Benj. P. : 

A Periodic Congress of Nations... 1907 .05 

Tryon, James L. : 

The Hague Peace System in Opera- 
tion 1911 $0.10 


Call, Arthur D. : 

The Interparliamentary Union.... 1923 .10 

20th Conference, Vienna 1922 . 10 

21st Conference, Copenhagen 1923 .10 

Twenty-third Conference in the 
United States and Canada, in- 
cluding 1925 .25 

Story of the conference Published. 

Who's who of the conference 
Addresses by — 

Frank B. Kellogg, Secretary 

of State 
Senator William B. McKin- 
ley, President of the U. S. 
Elihu Root, Codification of 

international law 
Theodore E. Burton, Codifi- 
cation of international 
Senator Claude E. Swanson, 
The Pan American Union 
Farewells at Niagara Falls 
Resolutions adopted by the 
Tryon, James L. : 

The Interparliamentary Union and 

its worli 1910 .05 

Call, Arthur D. : 

Our Country and World Peace. 


Johnson, Julia E. (Compiler) : 
1926 $1.25 Permanent Court of International 

Justice 1923 

Scott, James Brown : 

Peace Through Justice 1917 . 70 

Slightly shelf-worn books at reduced prices 


Balou, Adin : 

Christian Non-resistance. 278 
pages. First published 1846, and 

republished 1910 . 50 

Crosby, Ernest : 

Garrison, the Non-resistant. 141 

pages 1905 . 25 

La Fontaine, Henri : 

The Great Solation. 177 pages.. 1916 .70 

Lynch, Frederick : 

Through Europe on the Eve of 

War. 152 pages 1914 .25 

Von Suttner, Berthe : 

Lay Down Your Arms (a novel), 

435 pages 1914 .50 

White. Andrew D. : 

The First Hague Conference. 123 

pages 1905 . 50 


5th Universal Peace Congress, Chi- 
cago 1893 . 50 

First National Arbitration and Peace 

Congress, New York 1907 . 50 

Second National Peace Congress, Chi- 
cago 1909 . 50 

Third American Peace Congress, Bal- 
timore 1911 . 50 

Fourth American Peace Congress, St. 

Louis 1913 .50 

Fifth American Peace Congress, San 

Francisco 1915 . 50 

Twenty-first Annual Conference on 
International Arbitration. Lake 
Mohonk 1915 . 30 


Please enroll me as a member, of the class checked. Thus, I understand, I shall 
receive a free subscription to The Advocate of Peace, the Society's monthly magazine. 


D Annual $5 a year 

D Sustaining 10 a year 

n Contributing 25 a year 

D Institutional 25 a year 

D Life, $100 in one payment. 


n Send me a bill. 
n I enclose $ 

Name _. 

(D Subscription, only, to Advocate of Peace, $3) 


March, 1928 


THE celebration of the one hundredth 
anniversary of the American Peace 
Society in Cleveland, Ohio, May 7-11 
next, will be a worthy tribute to a worthy 
labor carried on for one hundred years 
in the interests of a worthy cause. It is 
doubtful, however, if it would warrant 
the expense of time, money, and energy 
if the only purpose were to celebrate the 
record of a society. 

There is a deeper reason. The threat 
of another world war hangs over us. 
Whether or not that war shall break de- 
pends upon the men and women engaged 
in the work of the world during this gen- 
eration. An unofficial conference of 
world leaders, therefore, and that in the 
United States, ought to be of major im- 

That eternal vigilance which is the 
price of liberty is also the price of peace. 
Vigilant or not, men and women every- 
where recognize the failures of men. 
And failures there are. 

There is the failure of the Geneva Arms 
Conference of a few months ago. It ap- 
pears that peoples everywhere wish to 
disarm, or at least materially to reduce 
their arms to mere police necessities; yet 
they can't find the way. Ten years after 
the war to end war, the world finds more 
men under arms than in 1914. Poison- 
ous gases, flying forces, and submarines are 
being developed increasingly, and that 

by the major powers of the world. Fears 
of a navy race, fears of every kind, are 
agitating well-nigh every nation, and that 
more than in the days before Sarajevo. 

There is the failure of men successfully 
to counteract these fears. Argentina, 
Brazil, and Spain have withdrawn from 
the League of Nations. There is the will 
to have and to hold versus the will to 
regain territories. There are the mil- 
lions of minorities sweating under yokes 
they dislike, with no apparent means of 
achieving justice for both sides to the 
dispute. Great powers have returned to 
the old methods of military alliances and 
to their ancient faith in the principle of 
the balance of power. France, benefi- 
ciary of the Treaty of Versailles, of Lo- 
carno, and of the League, has military 
alliances with nine other powers. This 
group finds itself in more or less hostile 
opposition to the Entente, composed of 
Italy, Albania, and Hungary, and pos- 
sibly Bulgaria. Italy's desire for expan- 
sion, her will to revive past glories, her 
resentfulness of French dominance in the 
League, certain evidences of her designs 
on Nice and Savoy because of French 
dominance in Tunis, Algeria, and Mo- 
rocco, confuse and disturb. Men talk 
frankly of the possibilities of a war in 
the Adriatic, which, if it should happen, 
might easily lead Germany, Hungary, 
Austria, and Bulgaria to move for the 
return of their lost territories. Then, in- 
deed, the world would sense its failures. 

Enmities there are, also, aplenty: 




France against Italy, Italy against Yugo- 
slavia, Hungary against Eumania, Ku- 
mania against Russia, Eussia against 
Poland, Poland against Lithuania, 
France against Germany. Dictatorships 
present their confusing issues. Poland, 
existing under a government set up by 
coup d'etat in 1926, is said to have ninety- 
two political associations and thirty politi- 
cal parties. There were fourteen changes 
of Poland's cabinet between 1918 and 
1926. There are dictatorships elsewhere 
and of a variety of kinds. The Mediter- 
ranean question, befogged by the pro- 
cesses of secret diplomacy which we know 
not of, creates the fear that Europe is 
developing into two armed camps, quite 
as before the war. Italy has intervened 
in Tangier quite as Germany did in 
Morocco. There are suspicions that 
powers employing the old methods of 
secret diplomacy are now planning to 
partition North Africa and North Arabia, 
with the possibility that Spain will ex- 
change Morocco for Tangier, with the 
view of trading it later for Gibraltar, and 
that France shall turn Syria over to Italy 
and assume the control of all Morocco. 
It is possible that Britain is co-operating 
with these operations, with the view of 
holding the oil lands of Mosul and of 
having her own way in Egypt. If these 
things are in any sense true, with Ger- 
many, Eussia, and Turkey outside, the 
two armed camps may have for their cen- 
ters of operation, respectively, Morocco 
and London. Such a division would rep- 
resent the climax of human failure. 
Surely the world needs to know more of 
tliese things. 

Too, the enigmas of our time are un- 
usually baffling. They need examination. 
What, for example, is the meaning of 
Eussia, and her evident return to cap- 
italistic forms? What of China, in her 

celestial throes of civil war? How far 
are chauvinists controlling affairs in 
Japan and elsewhere ? How many of our 
international diseases are due to the 
lowered vitality of leaders incident to the 
drains of the World War? What is the 
meaning of the Polish corridor and kin- 
dred strange products of the Treaty of 
Versailles? Is it possible to adjust sur- 
plus populations to their imhappy en- 
vironment? What has India, radiant 
with her sheen of mysticism, to offer? 
Who is to disentangle the conflicting na- 
tional ambitions and programs? Again, 
it would appear, an outstanding need just 
now is study and conference, not to men- 
tion faith and prayer. 

We poor peace workers need the best 
help of the best minds. Those of us with 
the Jehovah complex, even, can be 
brought to listen and to learn. Bootleg 
pacifists, with what is called their "gran- 
diose garrulity," can be brought to realize 
that their goal of absolutes, if a thing to 
be striven for, can never be attained. 
Calm and dispassionate men and women, 
thoughtfully concerned to do something 
worthily, want to know more of the mean- 
ing of the word "security," which the 
world seems unable to achieve in terms 
of force. Is it true that there is to be 
another European war by 1935, when the 
Allied armies are due to evacuate the 
Ehineland? Is it true that the world is 
only technically at peace, and that at a 
time when statesmen and peoples every- 
where are crying for peace? Is it true, 
as said, that there would be a general 
European war now if the nations had the 

There is need for counsel, discussion, 
study, and common conference. These are 
the advantages offered by the Conference 
on International Justice to be held in the 
city of Cleveland, May 7 to 11, 1928. 





THE Sixth Pan American Conference, 
held in Havana, Cuba, came to an 
end February 21. While it was impos- 
sible to produce unanimous agreement 
upon all questions, such as those relatmg 
to the tariff and intervention, it was able 
to produce real achievement, probably 
more than any of the series heretofore. As 
a result, for example, the Pan American 
Union may have upon its governing 
board men other than the diplomatic rep- 
resentatives accredited to Washington. 
The Pan American Union is now on a 
more permanent basis. There has been 
agreement upon a draft treaty on the 
rights and duties of neutrals in the event 
of war, upon a commercial aviation agree- 
ment, upon a treaty placing aliens abroad 
on the same footing as nationals, upon 
a treaty providing for international co- 
operation for the suppression and preven- 
tion of revolutions on each other's terri- 
tories, upon the adoption of a Pan Amer- 
ican Sanitary Code. Plans for an inter- 
American automobile highway, to extend 
from Canada to Patagonia, have been 
materially advanced. 

Wliile the United States could not on 
constitutional grounds agree to the code 
of private international law, nor wholly 
to the convention on maritime neutrality 
forbidding the arming of merchantmen 
for defense in time of war, progress in 
these respects is a fact. 

The conference agreed upon the prin- 
ciple of arbitration for the settlement of 
inter-American disputes, except those 
pertaining to the sovereignty and inde- 
pendence of nations. 

This resolution on compulsory arbitra- 
tion means the calling of a conference 
within a year, which conference is to be 
held in Washington. At this conference 
minimum and maximum exceptions and 

a Pan American convention for arbitra- 
tion will be drafted. This is good Amer- 
ican procedure, quite in line with the 
achievement of the two Hague conferences 
of 1899 and 1907. 

The aviation convention, guaranteeing 
the commercial development of aviation 
in this hemisphere, was undoubtedly pro- 
moted by the visit of Col. Charles A. 
Lindbergh to Havana during the con- 

Another outstanding achievement, 
somewhat negative in its nature, was the 
refusal to turn the Pan American Union 
into a political body. If it were to come 
about that the Pan American Union 
should appear as a competitor with legis- 
lative and executive departments of the 
various governments, the Union would 
undoubtedly disintegrate and cease to be. 

Eeaders of this journal will be particu- 
larly gratified at the achievements of the 
Committee on Public International Law. 
The treaties proposed stand a much better 
chance of ratification, because for the first 
time they represent all of the American 
republics and, further, because the treaties 
deal with problems regarding which there 
is substantial international agreement, 
both as to content and procedure. 

The outstanding achievement of the 
conference was the endorsement of the 
doctrine of compulsory arbitration, due 
largely to the efforts of Eauel Fernandez, 
president of the Brazilian delegation, sup- 
ported by our own Mr. Hughes. The 
provisions of this proposal are so impor- 
tant we repeat them here: 

"One. That the republics of America 
adopt obligatory arbitration as the means 
which they ^dll employ for the pacific 
solution of their international differences 
of a juridical nature. 

"Two. That the republics of America 
will meet in Washington within a period 
of one year, in a conference of conciliation 
and arbitration, to draw up a convention 
for the realization of this principle with 




the m^mimi expectations which they 
consider indispensable to safeguard the 
independence and the sovereignty of 
States, as well as its exercise in matters 
within their domestic jurisdiction, and 
also excluding matters involving the in- 
terests or relating to the action of a State 
not a party to the convention. 

"Three. That the governments of the 
American republics will send for this pur- 
pose plenipotentiaries with instructions 
regarding the maximum and the mini- 
mum which they would accept with re- 
gard to obligatory arbitral jurisdiction. 

"Four. That the convention or conven- 
tions of conciliation and arbitration which 
they succeed in drawing up should leave 
open a protocol of progressive arbitration 
which will permit the development of this 
beneficent institution to the greatest pos- 
sible extent. 

"Five. That the convention or conven- 
tions which may be drawn up, upon sig- 
nature should be submitted immediately 
to the respective governments for their 
ratification in the shortest possible time." 

The open protocol will permit nations 
willing to go further than others in sub- 
mitting their disputes to arbitration to do 
so. In this convention the representa- 
tives of the American republics have de- 
clared that they do not want war; that 
they do wish to advance the cause of arbi- 
tration without interfering with inde- 
pendence and sovereignty, without inter- 
fering with purely domestic matters, or 
with the interests of States not a party 
to the convention. 

Furthermore, and far from least, the 
Western Hemisphere knows that the 
United States of America has no im- 
perialistic designs against the sovereignty 
or the liberty of any other power. 


THE resignation of Dr. Honorio 
Pueyrredon as Argentine Ambassador 
to Washington and leader of his country's 
delegation to the Sixth Pan American 
Conference, announcement of which ap- 

peared February 16, four days before the 
end of the conference, was not only a re- 
grettable incident of the conference, but 
it is regretted by a wide circle of the am- 
bassador's friends all over the United 
States. Dr. Pueyrredon ranked high in 
the diplomatic corps in Washington. He 
has been one of the most active members 
of the Pan American Union. 

The reason for Dr. Pueyrredon's action 
was the refusal of the conference to accept 
an amendment to the preamble of the con- 
vention relating to the organization of the 
Pan American Union. The proposed 
amendment was as follows : 

"Since economic co-operation is an es- 
sential factor in carrying out the forego- 
ing purposes, the signatory States shall 
favor the suppression of unjust obstruc- 
tions and excessive artificial barriers 
which may hinder natural commercial in- 
tercourse or restrain reasonable commer- 
cial liberty among the American nations, 
without, however, construing this to mean 
the granting of special privileges or the 
taking of measures of exclusion." 

It is evident that Dr. Pueyrredon has 
not been satisfied with the operations of 
the Pan American Union. He has viewed 
that organization as an agency for the 
promotion of inter-American commerce, 
and that as such the interests of Argen- 
tina have not always been satisfactorily 
looked after. 

It must be admitted that Dr. Pueyrre- 
don has had some unhappy experience. 
When our farmers asked our Tariff Com- 
mission to increase the tariff rates on corn 
and flaxseed 50 per cent, and it was pro- 
posed that experts of our country should 
be sent to Argentina for the purpose of 
investigating the cost of production, Ar- 
gentina did not receive the proposal with 
favor. Indeed, the Argentine Embassy 
gave the Tariff Commission to understand 
that such experts would not be received 
in its country. This leaves our Tariff 




Commission to get along as best it can in 
the matter of fixing rates on Argentine 
corn and flaxseed. Again, our Depart- 
ment of Agriculture placed an embargo 
on all Argentine chiUed meat, on the 
ground that Argentine cattle were largely 
infected with foot and mouth disease. Dr. 
Pueyrredon vigorously fought this em- 
bargo, and proved that the indictment of 
Argentine cattle was without justification. 
Upon his intiative we are now recogniz- 
ing certificates of the Argentine Depart- 
ment of Agriculture as to the condition of 
meats shipped to this country. The em- 
bargo no longer exists. Furthermore, 
upon the theory that alfalfa seed imported 
from Argentina is unsuitable for sowing 
in any part of the United States, the 
Department of Agriculture issued a de- 
cree that no alfalfa seed could be imported 
from Argentina unless 10 per cent of it 
was first colored red. This meant practi- 
cally a complete embargo. The argument 
for this embargo was that alfalfa seed 
grown in the milder climate of Argentina 
is unsuitable for sowing in the colder 
regions of the United States. The injus- 
tice of this embargo lay in the fact that 
the climate of the seed-growing region of 
Argentina was quite the same as that of 
the southern half of the United States. 
The department therefore changed its de- 
cree to require that the 10 per cent of the 
seed be colored orange-yellow, indicating 
its suitability for certain regions of thp 
United States. Since, however, the neces- 
sity of coloring 10 per cent of the seed 
costs so much, even this new decree is 
practically an embargo. Another diffi- 
culty which the Ambassador has had to 
meet related to grapes. California grape- 
growers induced the Department of Agri- 
culture to place an embargo on all ship- 
ments of Argentine grapes on the ground 
that Argentine vineyards were infected 
with the Mediterranean fly. The Argen- 
tine Department of Agriculture declared 

the charges to be unjust and demanded 
that an entomologist make personal inves- 
tigations on the grounds. In 1927, fol- 
lowing an examination by one of its own 
experts, our Department of Agriculture 
lifted the embargo, agreeing to accept cer- 
tificates of origin issued by the Argentine 
Department of Agriculture. These are 
some of the irritating experiences endured 
by Dr. Pueyrredon during his experience 
as Ambassador. 

True, he has handled each of these 
situations with marked ability. It must 
be said that he has come out victor in 
most of the disputes. But it is easy to 
understand, in the light of his experience, 
why he is so sensitive about "unjust ob- 
structions," "excessive artificial barriers,*' 
and "reasonable commercial liberty" in 
future relations between his country and 

Nevertheless, it is difficult to see how 
his resignation will help toward the estab- 
lishment of that better "economic co- 
operation" which he craves. 

Mr. Hughes' reply to Dr. Pueyrredon, 
while satisfactory to the other members of 
the subcommittee, was not satisfactory to 
the Ambassador. Everybody, including 
the Ambassador, seems to agree that the 
Pan American Union exists for the promo- 
tion of Pan American co-operation. The 
economic barriers to which Dr. Pueyrre- 
don objected are, as Mr. Hughes pointed 
out, provisions established by the legisla- 
tures of States. No one can question the 
right of a nation to protect its people, to 
determine what goods shall enter a coun- 
try, what duties shall be imposed, or what 
export taxes shall be levied. Every coun- 
try has provisions relating to the import 
and export of products and raw materials. 
Mexico decides her own policies with ref- 
erence to the production of oil and the 
taxation of exports; Chile does the same 
for her nitrates, and so on. These are 
legislative acts and not subject to change 




by the Pan American Union. They may 
be debated and congresses may be peti- 
tioned, but all such acts are legislative in 
character and outside the activities of the 
Pan American Union, Countries enact- 
ing these laws do not consider them artifi- 
cial or unjust. 

Evidently the Pan American Union is 
not organized to handle such delicate mat- 
ters. It is probably well that it isn't. In 
the language of Mr. Hughes : 

"To introduce the Pan American Union 
into these most delicate of all subjects, re- 
lating to the exercise by independent and 
sovereign States of their will with respect 
to the articles coming in or leaving their 
boundaries, would be simply to invite the 
destruction of the Pan American Union 
by making it the center of controversies 
which it could not resolve and to put it in 
opposition to the parliaments and con- 
gresses of the various States. 

"If any particular country has a ques- 
tion with another country as to particular 
goods, or duties, or taxes, the way to ap- 
proach the subject, it would seem to me, 
would be through negotiations and 
through the presentation of facts which 
can reach the proper legislative authority. 
And such facts may be considered by each 
country as it determines its action as to 
its exports and imports. 

"I think it was for these reasons — not 
for any special reasons relating to the 
United States, but for the reasons which 
would apply to other countries — that the 
members of the subcommittee, with the 
exception of the President of the Argen- 
tine delegation, felt that we should not at- 
tempt to introduce special economic prob- 
lems in the preamble relating to the or- 
ganization of the Pan American Union. 

'It was to save the Pan American 
Union for the good it could do, and not 
to prevent it from accomplishing purposes 
which it could hold, that it was thought 
best not to introduce subjects with which 
it was incompetent to deal." 

Dr. Pueyrredon has agreed that the Pan 
American Union should not be burdened 
with political functions. Tariffs are usu- 

ally political matters. It is difficult, how- 
ever, always to draw the line between po- 
litical and economic questions. It has 
been the aim of the Pan American Union 
to facilitate commerce between all of the 
American republics. But even commer- 
cial relations may become political, and 
then the difficulties connected with them 
are not always easy to resolve. In the 
light of these facts, it is easy to under- 
stand that irritations over many differ- 
ences of opinion are sure to arise in the 
settlement of disputes, even between 
States of our Western Hemisphere. It is 
difficult to see, however, how Dr. Puey- 
rredon's resignation can promote the in- 
terests of the Pan American Union or ad- 
vance the high purposes of the Sixth Pan 
American Conference at Havana. 


date of January 25, introduced in the 
Hotise of Eepresentatives a resolution, 
now known as House Joint Kesolution 
183. This resolution was referred to the 
Committee on Foreign Affairs and 
ordered to be printed. Five days later, 
approved by the Committee, it was re- 
ferred to the House Calendar. In sub- 
mitting the resolution, Mr. Burton, speak- 
ing for the Committee on Foreign Af- 
fairs, said: 

"The Commttee on Foreign Affairs of 
the House of Representatives, having had 
under consideration House Joint Resolu- 
tion No. 183, on the 26th of January 
unanimously voted in favor of reporting 
the same and recommending that it do 

"The first section of this resolution, in 
unequivocal language, declares it to be 
the policy of the United States to pro- 
hibit the exportation of arms, munitions, 
or implements of war to any nation which 
is engaged in war with another. 

*"rhe second section provides that when- 
ever the President recognizes the existence 




of war between foreign nations by making 
the usual proclamation of neutrality, it 
shall be imlawful, except by the consent 
of the Congress, to export or attempt to 
export any arms, mimitions, or imple- 
ments of war from any place in the 
United States or any possession thereof to 
the territory of either belligerent or to 
any place from which the ultimate des- 
tination is such territory, or for any mili- 
tary or naval force of a belligerent. 

*'The third section defines in very con- 
siderable detail, in 14 subsections, what 
is meant by 'arms, munitions, or imple- 
ments of war.' This has been thought 
necessary in order that in the enforce- 
ment of the law there may be no am- 
biguity as to what is included in the pro- 
hibition of exportations ; also, in order 
that it may be made clear that other 
articles not included in the enumeration 
can be exported without violation of the 
law. While Congress undoubtedly would 
have the right to suspend or repeal the 
prohibitions enumerated in the resolution, 
it is thought best to make specific men- 
tion of the fact that 'by the consent of 
the Congress' the inhibition of the resolu- 
tion may be removed. This would mean 
that, as to any or all of the belligerents, 
Congress could remove the prohibition. 

"The fourth section specifies the pen- 
alty, a fine not exceeding $10,000 and 
imprisonment not exceeding two years, 
and imposes upon the Secretary of the 
Treasury the duty of reporting violations 
to the United States district attorney for 
the district wherein the violation is al- 
leged to have been committed. 

"This resolution marks a notably ad- 
vanced step for the prevention of war and 
the promotion of universal peace. 

"It is certainly a well-known fact that 
no nation can wage war for any consider- 
able time, or on any large scale, unless 
implements of warfare can be obtained 
from neutral nations. In every great 
contest the demand has been made upon 
the neutral nations for necessary sup- 
plies. It has not been thought best to 
prohibit the exportation of food or articles 
used alike by the civilian population as 
well as in the prosecution of war. 

"It must be said that the United States 
has taken a leading part in detaching our 
own country from the quarrels of other 

nations and seeking to establish prin- 
ciples of neutrality. On this subject 
Professor Oppenheim says in his work 
on International Law (vol. 2, p. 357) 
that in the development of rules of neu- 
trality the most prominent and influential 
factor was the attitude of the United 
States of America toward neutrality from 
1793 to 1818. He then describes the 
measures taken by President Washington 
and by the Congress during and after his 
administration, and adds that the example 
of the United States initiated the present 
practice, according to which it is the duty 
of neutrals to prevent the sending out 
and arming on their territory of cruisers 
for belligerents, to prevent enlistments 
on their territory for belligerents, and the 

"Under principles of international law, 
already established, a neutral nation is 
forbidden to furnish implements of war- 
fare to a belligerent, though its citizens 
may at their own risk seek to furnish 
such supplies. In this latter particular, 
the resolution seeks to create an im- 
portant change. 

"Again, it is established and is set 
forth in article 8 of convention 13 of the 
Second Hague Conference (to which the 
United States is a party) that a neutral 
government is bound to employ the means 
at its disposal to prevent the sending out 
or arming of any vessel within its juris- 
diction which it has reason to believe is 
intended to cruise or engage in hostile 
operations against a power with which 
that government is at peace. Also, there 
is a prohibition, in the absence of specific 
provisions, to the effect that belligerent 
warships are not permitted to remain in 
the port of a neutral power for more than 
24 hours except in the cases covered by 
that convention. Such warships are for- 
bidden to revictual in neutral ports ex- 
cept to bring up their supplies to the 
peace standards, and may only ship suffi- 
cient fuel to enable them to reach the 
nearest port in their own country. The 
resolution seeks to harmonize the policy 
of this country in the furnishing of mili- 
tary supplies to certain regulations per- 
taining to naval warfare. 

"As the United States has taken a lead- 
ing part in the establishment of bene- 
ficitd principles of neutrality and has 




adopted regulations tending to promote 
peace, it is regarded as of the greatest 
importance that this resolution should 
pass. It will be a declaration on the part 
of the United States that we do not de- 
sire that our citizens should participate 
in the profits derived from the furnishing 
of implements of destruction. It is 
thought also that this will be a restrain- 
ing influence when nations are about to 
embark in war, and it is hoped that other 
countries may, should this become a law, 
adopt similar regulations. 

"There can be no question of the ear- 
nest desire of the great body of the Amer- 
ican people to promote peace and prevent 
the horrors of war. Among all pending 
measures which look to this result, this 
may be regarded as one of the most salu- 
tary and most helpful. 

"The following is a copy of the resolu- 
tion :" 

Joint Resolution to Prohibit the Exportation 
of Arms, Munitions, or Implements of War 
to Belligerent Nations. 

Resolved T>y the Senate and House of Rep- 
resentatives of the United States of America 
in Congress assembled, That it is hereby de- 
clared to be the policy of the United States 
of America to prohibit the exportation of 
arms, munitions, or implements of war to 
any nation which is engaged in war with 

Seo. 2. Whenever the President recognizes 
the existence of war between foreign nations 
by making proclamation of the neutrality 
of the United States, it shall be unlawful, 
except by the consent of the Congress, to ex- 
port or attempt to export any arms, muni- 
tions, or implements of war from any place 
in the United States or any possession 
thereof, to the territory of either belligerent 
or to any place if the ultimate destination of 
such arms, munitions, or implements of war 
is within the territory of either belligerent 
or any military or naval force of either bel- 

Sec. 3. As used in this joint resolution, the 
term "arms, munitions, or implements of 
war" means — 

1. Rifles, muskets, carbines. 

2. (a) Machine guns, automatic rifles, and 
machine pistols of all calibers; (6) mount- 

ings for machine guns; (c) interrupter 

3. Projectiles and ammunition for the 
arms enumerated in numbers 1 and 2 above. 

4. Gun-sighting apparatus, including aerial 
gxm sights and bomb sights, and fire-control 

5. (a) Cannon, long or short, and howitz- 
ers, of a caliber less than five and nine- 
tenths inches (fifteen centimeters) ; (6) 
cannon, long or short, and howitzers, of a 
caliber of five and nine-tenths inches (fifteen 
centimeters) or above; (c) mortars of all 
kinds; (d) gun carriages, mountings, re- 
cuperators, accessories for mountings. 

6. Projectiles and ammunition for the arms 
enumerated in number 5 above. 

7. Apparatus for the discharge of bombs, 
torpedoes, depth charges, and other kinds 
of projectiles. 

8. (a) Grenades; (6) bombs; (c) land 
mines, submarine mines, fixed or floating, 
depth charges; (d) torpedoes. 

9. Appliances for use with the above arms 
and apparatus. 

10. Bayonets. 

11. Tanks and armored cars; aircraft de- 
signed for purposes of warfare. 

12. Arms and ammunition not specified in 
the above enumeration prepared for use in 

13. Poisonous gases, acids, or any other 
articles or inventions prepared for use in 

14. Component parts of the articles enum- 
erated above if capable of being used in the 
assembly or repair of the said articles or 
as spare parts. 

Sec. 4. Whoever exports or attempts to 
export any arms, munitions, or implements 
of war in violation of the provisions of this 
resolution shall, upon conviction thereof, be 
punished by a fine not exceeding $10,(X)0, and 
by imprisonment not exceeding two years. 
It shall be the duty of the Secretary of the 
Treasury to report any such violation of the 
provisions of this resolution to the United 
States district attorney for the district 
wherein the violation is alleged to have been 

The effect of this resolution would be 
greatly enhanced if it were to become the 
acknowledged policy of aU the major arms 
producing countries. 





GEEMAN practical sense is needed, 
apparently, in the study of the prob- 
lem of international peace. Amid all the 
irrelevant talk about this major problem 
of the world, seemingly the most irrele- 
vant has to do with the problem of secur- 
ity. But this cannot be rightfully said of 
Germany. "Under date of January 37, the 
German Government offered some observa- 
tions to the Aribitration and Security 
Committee of the Preparatory Disarma- 
ment Commission of the League of Na- 
tions. These views, in the nature of a 
memorandum, are entitled to more consid- 
eration than they seem as yet to have re- 

From this memorandum it is apparent 
that the German Government is little in- 
terested in merely theoretical schemes for 
promoting security or for stopping war 
when war is on. It believes the important 
task to be the establishment of practical 
measures, necessary and attainable in 
present political situations. A theoretical 
system, however defensible in logic, can- 
not be trusted to solve the problem of se- 
curity. Indeed, such a system might 
easily prove to be more dangerous than 
otherwise. The secret of security is to 
avoid entanglements leading to war. Such 
entanglements can be avoided by making 
it possible for all conflicts to be subjected 
to peaceful methods of settlement, and 
that with some prospect of public support. 
This, it may be mentioned, is the position 
of the American Peace Society. It ought 
to be possible for nations to achieve their 
interests without resort to war. The 
American Peace Society believes that this 
is possible. Germany believes that it is 
possible. The "optional clause'* of the 
statute of the Permanent Court of Inter- 
national Justice offers a satisfactory pos- 
sibility of settling disputes of a judicial 

character. Germany has agreed to abide 
by this clause. Germany naturally won- 
ders why all members of the League can't 
also accept it. Furthermore, she calls the 
attention of the committee to the familiar 
practices of conciliation and urges a re- 
turn to them in the interest of a real 

In one respect the German note is in 
error. It expresses regret that there is no 
general system of procedure for dealing 
with disputes of an exclusively political 
character. It holds that the submission of 
every imaginable dispute of an exclusively 
political character, under a system of com- 
pulsory jurisdiction to arbitration, cannot 
be practical under existing circumstances. 
This position, it must be said, is not justi- 
fied by our American history. In the ex- 
perience of our own States, for example, 
it has been held by the Supreme Court, 
and found to be workable in practice, that 
any dispute between States referred to the 
court by mutual agreement becomes by 
that agreement judicial and a matter for 
the court to decide. This fact applies also 
to the processes of arbitration. We gather 
the impression, therefore, that Germany 
underestimates the possibilities of arbitra- 
tion. Her attitude toward judicial settle- 
ment and conciliation, however, wiU be 
quite acceptable in the United States. 

The German memorandum repudiates 
the plans for establishing security by mili- 
tary alliances, such as are provided for in 
certain sections of the Covenant of the 
League of Nations, in the Geneva Proto- 
col, and in a variety of proposals offered 
particularly by France. In this respect 
Germany will find a responsive chord, not 
only in the United States, but in Great 

The hard-headed German is peculiarly 
qualified to speak upon this matter of se- 
curity. His own country has had no lit- 
tle experience with a military machine of 
no mean proportions. He now knows the 




result. He wants no more of it for him- 
self. He wonders that other peoples, in 
the light of his experience, should seek se- 
curity only in military sanctions or pen- 
alties. He believes that, in case peaceful 
means are not adequate, there are cer- 
tainly enough military possibilities lying 
around without organizing any more. 
There are clauses in the Covenant of the 
League relating to the prevention of war. 
Why not try them out? It is the task of 
the Council to prevent disputes from driv- 
ing interested powers to arms. Why not 
trust it? He points to Article XI, with its 
practical proposals, which could be supple- 
mented by voluntary obligations. Why 
not give them a fair test ? This has been 
done in the Locarno Agreement. Similar 
agreements can be drawn up between 
other groups, taking into account the se- 
curity of special districts, as long as they 
are voluntary and do not conflict with the 
interests of non-participating States. 

The German believes there can be no 
security of one State predicated upon 
another's insecurity. And of course he is 
right. Alliances within the League of 
Nations endanger the League, paralyzing 
all common action in times of crises. Se- 
curity in its final forms must rest not 
upon sanctions of the penalty or warlike 
kind, but upon confidence in the mutually 
accepted ways of peaceable settlement. 

Peace between nations must rest, of 
course, upon a consciousness of security. 
In time of war, security may depend upon 
sufficient military strength to overcome 
the enemy. Too, in time of peace, a meas- 
ure of security may for a time depend 
upon a certain amount of military force. 
But huge military machinery is a war-time 
and not a peace-time basis of security. 
We doubt that disarmed Germany, or dis- 
armed Bulgaria, or disarmed Austria, or 
disarmed Hungary are worried about 
their security. France, on the other hand, 
occupies the Ehineland, basks under the 

Treaty of Versailles, knows that her se- 
curity along the Ehine is guaranteed by 
the armies and navies of Great Britain 
and Italy, boasts of her faith in the Cove- 
nant of the League of Nations, rides her 
military alliances with nine other powers, 
each one of which is better armed than 
Germany; she is the beneficiary of the 
Dawes Plan, and supplements all with 
over a half million soldiers, and yet she 
worries continually about her security. 

The security of Europe depends upon 
the avoidance of warlike complications, 
upon a return to and the use of the well- 
known and established methods for arriv- 
ing at justice. The German Government 
is right when it says that for the commit- 
tee to take as its starting point an out- 
break of hostilities and a provision for 
military sanctions, instead of the peaceful 
settlement of all sorts of international 
conflict, would be like starting to build a 
house from the roof downward. War is 
not to be averted for long by military al- 
liances for a war against war. This seems 
now to be the German doctrine. It is 
American doctrine. It is the belief of the 
American Peace Society. 


THE Catholic Association for Inter- 
national Peace has given a recent il- 
lustration of wise church procedure in 
the interests of peace. A report on inter- 
national ethics, prepared by a committee 
of nine leading Catholic college and uni- 
versity professors and revised following 
a meeting of the national organization, 
was released February 17. In present- 
ing this report of one of its committees 
on international ethics, the association 
announces that it is taking its first step 
toward the development of a peace pro- 
gram and that it is in the nature simply 
of a preliminary report to the organiza- 




tion. Since the coining Conference of 
the American Peace Society at Cleveland 
is to have a Study Commission devoted 
to the international implications of re- 
ligion, to include Catholics, we hope, this 
report of our Catholic bretliren is of 
special interest. 

The report takes up, in general, the 
obligation of governments to follow the 
moral law, their duties under the precept 
of justice, their duties in charity, the 
conditions of a just war and the obliga- 
tions to promote peace, and is prefaced 
by a brief account of the relation between 
international law and international ethics 
and the growth of modem international 
law from the writings of Spanish Cath- 
olic theologians after the discovery of 

"States, like individuals," the report 
says, "are subject to the moral precepts 
of both nature and revelation. Every in- 
ternational action of a State must be 
justified or condemned in the light of its 
effect upon the welfare of human beings; 
and the moral claims of all State groups 
are of equal intrinsic worth." 

Under the heading the precept of jus- 
tice, the report in considering the sov- 
ereignty of a State declares that while 
the sovereignty of all States or govern- 
ments is equal, the term sovereignty is 
not identical with moral authority and 
does not permit a State to do wrong, and 
that even a government which does not 
possess full sovereign authority still pos- 
sesses its moral rights against the State 
that is sovereign over it and against aU 
other States. 

"The principal rights of States relate 
to self-preservation and self-develop- 
ment," the report continues. Under 
these headings it brings up the much- 
disputed question of intervention. The 
question is considered again under the 
obligation of charity to other nations. 

"Self-preservation includes," the re- 
port reads, "protection of the lives and 
property of nationals in foreign countries. 
The circumstances permitting it and the 
type of intervention permitted are both 
narrowly circumscribed in the report. 

"Conditions in a foreign territory," 
the committee says, "might be so dis- 

turbed, the political authority might be 
so inadequate and so insecure, that so- 
journers or investors there would have no 
moral right to call upon their own gov- 
ernments for protection of either life or 
property. While citizens have in general 
a valid claim to protection by their gov- 
ernment in foreign lands, it is limited by 
the right of their country and their fel- 
low-citizens not to be exposed to dispro- 
portionately grave inconvenience. Trav- 
elers and investors in foreign lands have 
no right to expect as much protection 
from their governments as they would 
have obtained had they remained at 

The report makes a distinction between 
intervention and armed intervention. 
"In any case," it says, "armed interven- 
tion on behalf of the former interests is 
never justified when they can be secured 
through peaceful means, such as negotia- 
tions, arbitration, severing diplomatic re- 
lations, and putting an embargo upon 
trade with the offending State." The re- 
port places a similar limitation upon the 
protection due diplomatic immunity and 
says in this connection that "national 
honor" has many times been used as a 
pretext for wars of aggression. 

The report returns to the right of in- 
tervention when it considers the duty of 
charity to other peoples. Governments 
have the duty, and therefore the right, to 
intervene in the affairs of other nations, 
the committee says, when, for example, 
"there is grave and long-continued op- 
pression of one State by another, the re- 
volt of a people or a nation against in- 
tolerable tyranny, the unsuccessful efforts 
of a State to put down a rebellion which 
injures national or international welfare, 
grossly immoral practices, such as can- 
nibalism and human sacrifices under the 
guise of religion, and continued anarchy 
in a State that is for the present unable 
to maintain a tolerably competent gov- 

These evils, the report says, must, 
however, be "definite, certain, and ex- 
treme. The motive of the nation which 
intervenes must be free from selfishness. 
A State has no right whatever to use 
armed force in the affairs of another, so 
long as milder methods, even those of 
moral coercion, are sufficient." 




Considering the right of self-develop- 
ment of nations, the committee hedges it 
about with strict limitations. 

"The right to self-development must 
be exercised with due regard to the rights 
of other States," the committee declares. 
"It does not justify conquest nor making 
the flag follow either migration or trade 
nor forcible annexation of territory which 
had once been subject to the State that 
thus seeks expansion.'" The report grants 
the right of colonization, but restricts it 
"to sparsely developed territory, which 
lacks an organized government worthy of 
the name," and declares that the govern- 
ment occupying the territory must "safe- 
guard all the natural rights of the natives, 
including that of property,'' and must 
"provide for their education — physical, 
mental, and moral — and develop their 
capacity for some measure of govern- 
ment." Withdrawal from a colony or 
protectorate is, in turn, a conditional 
obligation that becomes certain "when in- 
dependence becomes essential to the wel- 
fare of the people." 

The report does not give universal 
validity to the "right of self-determina- 
tion," but describes a national group that 
"might occupy a distinct territory, might 
have an average capacity for self-govern- 
ment, might have formerly enjoyed politi- 
cal independence, and might be in a posi- 
tion to exercise it without violating the 
rights of the State in which it is now 
incorporated," which would undoubtedly 
"possess a moral right to separation and 
self-rule." The claim is justified "by the 
end of all governments, namely, human 
welfare." The report continues: "Na- 
tional minorities have a right to maintain 
their language, customs, sense of unity, 
and all their other national characteris- 
tics, so long as their possessions are not 
clearly and gravely detrimental to the 
welfare of the majority or of the State 
as a whole." The report warns govern- 
ments of the delicacy of such a task and 
adds that in such cases they are prone to 
underestimate the problems and their 

International intercourse — the "ex- 
change of goods, material, moral and in- 
tellectual" — the committee declares, is 
based on the general need of co-operation 
and is proven most strikingly, in the 

committee's opinion, by the "common 
right of all persons to use and enjoy the 
bounty of Nature." Barriers to inter- 
national intercourse, such as tariflfe, ex- 
port taxes, embargoes, and immigration 
restriction, are analyzed in relation to the 
obligations of justice and charity. Ex- 
cessive export taxes and embargoes are 
considered generally to inflict upon other 
nations "much greater injury than to re- 
duce the opportunity of marketing prod- 
ucts" by import tariffs. Immigration 
restriction is considered probably not a 
violation of justice to other peoples and 
may not be a violation of charity, but is 
a violation of charity "when maintained 
by a rich and powerful State over one that 
is weak and overpopulated." 

Following this, treaty obligations, the 
conditions of the obligation to fulfill an 
unjust treaty and the obligations of new 
governments to meet obligations of their 
predecessors are discussed as obligations 
of justice. 

Duties of charity — of "love and assist- 
ance" — are incumbent upon States, the 
committee declares, as well as duties of 
justice. Curbing "nationalism and exces- 
sive patriotism" and developing and pro- 
moting "a reasonable and moderate in- 
ternationalism" stand among the chief 
duties of charity, according to the mind 
of the committee. "All peoples," the re- 
port continues, "are equal in nature and 
intrinsic worth and are of equal im- 
portance in the sight of God. All the 
nations have claims upon one another, 
both in justice and in charity. All have 
certain common interests. All wiU pros- 
per best if they recognize those claims 
and interests, both in theory and in prac- 
tice. Sane internationalism does not in- 
volve the destruction nor the diminution 
of reasonable patriotism any more than 
good citizenship requires neglect of one's 

The committee rejects the proposition 
that "all employment of force among 
nations is immoral." It proceeds then to 
lay down two preliminary assumptions 
and five conditions for a just war : 

1. "A sovereign authority — not a pri- 
vate person or group, nor a subordinate 
political division — possesses this right." 

2. "Equally obvious is a right inten- 
tion; even though engaged in justifiable 




warfare, a State should not include 
wrongful ends among its objectives/' 

3. "A State may make war only to 
safeguard its rights, actually violated or 
in certain or imminent danger; hence a 
war is not morally justified which aims 
at extending national territory, enhanc- 
ing national power and prestige, promot- 
ing an international 'balance of power,' 
or forestalling some hypothetical or 
merely probable menace. Utterly inade- 
quate are the formulations 'the good of 
the community,' 'public peace,' 'neces- 
sity,' and similar general terms, which 
can be and have been used as pretexts 
for unnecessary wars. Moreover, legiti- 
mate defense of rights implies that the 
aggrieved State is not simultaneously 
violating the rights of the State against 
which it contemplates war." 

4. "The violation of national rights 
must appear to the aggrieved State as 
morally certain. No degree of prob- 
ability, nor even a great preponderance 
of probability, is sufficient. 'A declara- 
tion of war is equivalent to a sentence 
of death; to pronounce the latter with a 
doubtful conscience is murder.' " 

5. "Neither actual violation of national 
rights nor moral certainty about it, nor 
both combined, are sufficient to make war 
lawfully moral. War, particularly in 
modern times, inflicts so many, so vari- 
ous, and such enormous injuries upon 
innocent and guilty alike that it cannot 
be justified except by very grave reasons, 
by the gravest Imown to human society." 

6. "Even though all three of the fore- 
going conditions are fulfilled, a declara- 
tion of war is not justified. Eecourse to 
war is not justified until all peaceful 
methods have been tried and found inade- 
quate. The principal pacific means are 
direct negotiation, diplomatic pressure of 
various kinds, such as trade embargoes, 
boycotts, and rupture of normal interna- 
tional intercourse, and mediation and ar- 
bitration." If all these fail, the com- 
mittee adds, quoting the words of the 
1920 Pastoral Letter of the American 
Hierarchy, "the calm, deliberate judg- 
ment of the people rather than the aims 
of the ambitious few should decide 
whether war is the only solution," 

7. "A government should have solid 
reasons, proportionate to the evil alterna- 
tive of defeat, for expecting victory." 

The committee states, in addition, that 
"an honest attempt by the nations to ob- 
serve all these conditions would make war 
practically impossible," and it adds that to 
continue a war, once it is justly declared, 
longer "than is necessary for the protec- 
tion or vindication of rights is quite as 
immoral as to begin it unnecessarily," 
and that during a war "justice may 
change sides." 

In the making of peace treaties the 
laws of justice and charity, the committee 
declares, must be observed. Victory, 
even when "the cause is just," confers 
no right to exact more than "adequate 
reparations and indemnities, while char- 
ity may require these obligations to be 
postponed or reduced or entirely condoned 
and canceled." Because "no victorious 
nation can be trusted to treat the con- 
quered nation with either justice or char- 
ity, it is desirable that peace treaties 
should be made under the supervision of 
some impartial tribunal." 

The final section of the committee re- 
port treats the obligation of a govern- 
ment to promote peace both as an obliga- 
tion of justice to its own people and an 
obligation of charity to other peoples. 
"These duties rest," the committee af- 
firms, "not only upon governments, but 
upon peoples, and particularly upon those 
persons and organizations which can exert 
influence upon public opinion and upon 
political rulers." 

"Human brotherhood," the committee 
says regarding education, "must be in- 
tensively and extensively preached to all 
groups and classes. It is not enough to 
declare that 'every human being is my 
neighbor.' Men must be reminded that 
'every human being' includes French- 
men, Germans, Italians, Englishmen, 
Japanese, Chinese, and all other divisions 
of the human family. And this doctrine 
should be repeated and reiterated. The 
duties of patriotism must be expounded 
in a more restrained and balanced way 
than that which has been followed hereto- 
fore. Men must be taught that it is not 
'sweet and becoming to die for one's 
country' if one's country is fighting for 
that which is unjust. Without denying 
or weakening the sentiment of national 
patriotism, we can set forth that wider 
and higher patriotism which takes in aU 
the peoples of the earth. A large part 




of our efforts in this field must be specifi- 
cally, courageously, and persistently di- 
rected against the spirit of exclusiveness 
and narrowness which characterizes that 
perversion of national sentiment now stig- 
matized as nationalism. The task of ar- 
resting and counteracting it will be long 
and arduous. Until it is accomplished, 
however, no fundamental progress can be 
made in the prevention of war and the 
safeguarding of peace. 

^'Instead of laying stress upon the law- 
fulness of engaging in a war of self-de- 
fense, we should clearly and fully and fre- 
quently set forth the conditions which 
are required according to the principles 
of morality. We should challenge dis- 
proof of the conclusion that these con- 
ditions have rarely been available to 
justify the outbreak of war. If it be ob- 
jected that statesmen have assumed the 
presence of these conditions, and there- 
fore have made war in good faith, the 
reply is that statesmen have seldom given 
the question an amount of honest con- 
sideration proportionate to the evils en- 
tailed by a declaration of war. We 
should put particular emphasis upon the 
fourth condition, namely, the exploration 
of all pacific methods for avoiding a 
bloody conflict. 

*^orld peace is largely, if not mainly, 
a matter of human faith. If the majority 
of people believe that peace can be es- 
tablished and secured, peace will be estab- 
lished and secured. We must persis- 
tently show that a reign of peace is feas- 
ible, until this idea and this faith be- 
come a dominating and effective element 
in the habitual thinking of an average 
man and woman. 

"As regards indefinite preparedness, 
two facts should be emphasized: First, 
this doctrine and policy provokes inter- 
national distrust, suspicion, and competi- 
tion in armament building. The second 
point to be stressed about preparedness 
refers to more than one country. All 
that a nation can hope for, all that any 
nation is warranted in attempting, is to 
be adequately prepared against reason- 
ably probable contingencies. On the 
other hand, it is neither necessary nor 
wise to reduce considerably present mili- 
tary and naval equipment until the most 

powerful foreign States agree to do like- 

"The second great duty is to consider 
fairly and to support, so far as our abili- 
ties and conscience permit, practical pro- 
posals and arrangements for preventing 
war and making peace secure. In gen- 
eral terms, these methods are : That moral 
right be substituted for the material force 
of arms in the reciprocal dealings of 
nations; the nations enter upon a just 
agreement for the simultaneous and re- 
ciprocal reduction of armaments; armed 
force be replaced by the noble and peace- 
ful institution of arbitration, with the 
provision that penalties be imposed upon 
any State which should refuse either to 
submit a national question to such a tri- 
bunal or to accept the arbitral decision. 

"World peace seems to be unattainable 
unless every one of these proposals and 
devices is somehow made to function. As 
sincere lovers of peace, it is our duty to 
consider them sympathetically and ade- 
quately, and, in the light of that examina- 
tion, to support any of them that wins 
our approval. Unless we strive for peace 
by specific and practical methods, all our 
peaceful professions are empty and futile. 
The obligation to attain an end implies 
an obligation to use the appropriate 


A SAMPLE European difficulty, not 
easily appreciated in the United 
States, is the controversy between Poland 
and Lithuania over the city of Vilna. The 
seriousness of this situation lies in the 
fact that France and her allies favor the 
claims of Poland, while Germany and her 
friends, not to mention Eussia, are in- 
clined to side with Lithuania. The issue 
between Lithuania and Poland, therefore, 
may reasonably become a European prob- 
lem of major importance. Since the 
Council of the League is to meet in 
March, the controversy may become again 
acute at that time. 

The complicated nature of tlie situa- 




tion, apparent enough, is not beyond an- 
alysis. An unauthorized Polish force, un- 
der General Zeligovski, seized the city of 
Vilna in October, 1920. Unable to retake 
the place by force of arms, Lithuania has 
recognized since that time a state of war 
with Poland, never giving up her claim to 
Vilna. Premier Waldemaras told the 
Council of the League, December last, 
that he was ready to give every guarantee 
of his country's peaceful intentions and 
of his willingness to set up a neutral zone 
between Lithuania and Poland, but that 
"Lithuania has a legal title to Vilna which 
she does not contemplate surrendering.'" 
Being in possession of Vilna, Poland's 
attitude is, "Let's be friends and resume 
normal relations." Lithuania's position is 
that to renew normal relations would be 
to acquiesce in the permanent possession 
of Vilna by Poland. Lithuania, wishing 
to regain Vilna, is for action. Poland, 
naturally, is for keeping things as they 
are. In spite of the fact that the Coun- 
cil of the League adopted the resolution, 
December 10 last, declaring the state of 
war between Poland and Lithuania to be 
at an end, a virtual state of war persists. 
The frontiers are closed and diplomatic 
relations are still suspended. No negotia- 
tions between Poland and Lithuania have 
begun. Poland aims to establish neigh- 
borly relations. Lithuania can find no 
reason for discussing frontier traffic with- 
out first agreeing as to where the frontier 
is. No wonder the Polish-Lithuanian 
problem continues to disturb the chancel- 
lories of Europe. 

OCE Department of State, January 
86, last, authorized by telegram the 
payment to the Secretariat of the League 
of Nations a total of $16,748.60 as the 
American share of the League's secretarial 
expenses in connection with certain recent 

conferences in which the United States 
has participated. Of this sum $5,475 are 
for the four sessions of the Preparatory 
Commission for the Disarmament Con- 
ference held to date; of the remainder the 
greater part is for the Economic Confer- 
ence, while smaller sums are for the 
Conference on Export and Import Prohi- 
bitions and Eestrictions and the Confer- 
ence on Communications and Transit. All 
of these conferences were held last year 
in Geneva. The American contribution is 
the same as the British, which is the larg- 
est sum hitherto paid by any country. 
This government also buys documents 
from the League to the amount of $400 

SOVIET dependence on the capitalistic 
* system came to light rather vividly 
again on February 1. On that day our 
Department of State obected to financial 
arrangements involving the flotation of a 
loan in the United States or the employ- 
ment of credit for the purpose of making 
an advance to the Soviet Regime. In ac- 
cordance with this policy, the department 
said that it does not view with favor 
financial arrangements designed to facili- 
tate in any way the sale of Soviet bonds 
in the United States. When one recalls 
other bonds repudiated long ago by the 
Soviets one wonders how circumstances 
could have arisen calling for such an an- 
nouncement from our government. 

ANOTHER evidence of human unity. 
J\. At 11:10 a. m., January 19, 1928, 
our Secretary of State, sitting in Washing- 
ton, conversed with the Honorable Hugh 
Gibson, American Ambassador to Bel- 
gium, sitting in Brussels, by telephone. 
The Secretary of State requested Mr. Gib- 
son to present his compliments to the 
Prime Minister of Belgium, to the Minis- 
ter for Foreign Affairs, and to compli- 




ment the Belgian Minister of Posts and 
Telegraphs upon the notable accomplish- 
ment of inaugurating telephone communi- 
cation between the United States and Bel- 
gium. Afterward the Secretary of State 
and the Belgian Minister of Posts and 
Telegraphs, Mr. Maurice Lippens, carried 
on a brief conversation. Later in the day 
our Department of State received a com- 
munication from the Belgian Ambassa- 
dor in Washington, to the effect that dur- 
ing a conversation which he had that 
morning with Mr. Maurice Lippens the 
latter requested the Ambassador to convey 
the following message to the Government 
of the United States : 

"The Government of the King is happy 
to see inaugurated this new line of com- 
munication between Belgium and the 
United States of America. 

"I am his interpreter in addressing in 
the name of the Belgian people a message 
of friendship to the American people and 
I hope that the telephonic relations which 
are inaugurated will be the beginning of 
closer economic relations which will con- 
tribute to the strengthening of the bonds 
of amity which history has forged between 
the great friendly Eepublic and Belgium.'* 

On February 10 our Acting Secretary 
of State had a radiotelephone conversation 
with the German Chancellor at Berlin, the 
first oflBcial opening of the trans-oceanic 
radiotelephone between Germany and the 
United States. 

JUST how militaristic are our military 
men? Peace workers are prone to 
condemn "militarists." These bloody per- 
sons are rarely referred to, however, by 
name. One's first impression is that the 
reference is to our soldiers. Our acquain- 
tance with the men in our army and navy 
has not led us to believe that this impres- 
sion is justified. Our Secretary of War 
has recently addressed himself to this 
matter. He has said, and in the main we 

think truly, that "military men are the 
last ones to desire war, and they have 
nothing whatever to do with declarations 
of war. Their function is to restore peace 
when it has been lost. Their whole pur- 
pose is to end a war as rapidly, as cheaply, 
and as effectively as possible. It is a mis- 
take to suppose that military men are 
more militaristic than their fellow citi- 
zens. The reverse I believe to be true. 
Militarism is a point of view or state of 
mind. The soldier who knows war and 
its consequences, and who realizes that he 
himself must bear wounds and hardships, 
and perhaps lose his life, is disposed to be 
concerned in any action that may lead to 
hostilities. On the other hand, the civil- 
ian who is not directly influenced by a 
knowledge of the realities of war may, 
through enthusiasm or excess or prejudice 
or partisanship, be more militaristic than 
the soldier. There may be individual and 
national exceptions, but the trend of mili- 
tary thought in time of peace is to place 
one's own nation in a position beyond the 
reach of war." It is our opinion that wars 
today are fought upon the initiative not 
so much of our military forces as of the 
people themselves. From what we know 
of war, we believe that there is more 
magnanimity and compassion toward en- 
emy soldiers among the men who do the 
fighting than among the people back 
home. Everyone who believes at all in 
an army and a navy wishes that both these 
should be as efficient as possible. We do 
not promote the cause of peace between 
nations by advertising ill-considered 
views of soldiers and sailors or by blink- 
ing the fact that there is little chance of 
war except with the advice and consent of 
us who make up the common people. 

THE hope of the peace movement 
thrives on that impregnable persist- 
ence of righteousness at the heart of our 




human kind. There is no doubt that that 
righteousness exists. Without it men 
would still be living in caves, brothers 
only of the beasts. When Leonard D. and 
Arthur J. Baldwin, brothers and partners 
in a New York law firm, recently gave 
$1,500,000 for the establishment of a 
school of liberal arts at Drew Theological 
Seminary, Madison, New Jersey, it was 
stipulated that the new school be known 
as "Brothers College." When it was pro- 
posed to call the new liberal arts college 
"Baldwin," the brothers decided against 
this because of their desire to perpetuate 
not their own names, but the idea of the 
brotherly relationship existing between 
them. Together from childhood, they 
were students at the preparatory school 

and graduated together from Cornell 
in the class of 1892. They entered 
business together, married within three 
months of each other, and for more than 
thirty years the two families lived in the 
same home. Their earnings go into the 
same purse. They have brought their 
children up together like brothers and sis- 
ters. Having worked their own way 
through the schools, they have chosen 
Drew Seminary as the location for the new 
college of liberal arts, as north Jersey of- 
fers unusual opportunity for the many 
boys who wish to work while getting their 
education. "Brothers College" indeed! 
Incidentally, here is a sample of that dis- 
criminating spirit of high morality upon 
which rests the hope of the world. 




THE Sixth Pan American Conference, 
held in Havana, Cuba, January 16 to 
February 20, was attended by representa- 
tives of all the twenty-one republics of this 
hemisphere. Canada was not represented. 
Although the conference was unable to 
come to any agreement on all the ques- 
tions of public international law, seven 
projects relating to asylum, treaties, mar- 
itime neutrality, diplomatic agents, con- 
suls, neutrality in civil strifes, and to the 
status of foreigners, were adopted. The 
United States is a party to all except the 
first. There is also a long list of eco- 
nomic, social, and cultural achievements. 

Convention on Aviation Adopted 

Among these are the adoption of a con- 
vention on commercial aviation, the con- 
vention reorganizing the Pan American 
Union, the passing of resolutions urging 

frequent meetings of journalists, a lower 
tariff of books and educational matter 
between the Americas, and the exchange of 
professors and students. 

The American delegation, according to 
their summary, refrained from voting in 
the committee on private international 
law, due to the impossibility of guaran- 
teeing adoption by the several States of 
the United States. 

The American delegation also refused 
to approve the proposal to study immi- 
gration, maintaining that immigration is 
a purely domestic problem. 

The summary of the conference follows : 

Committee I, Pan American Union, ap- 
proved a resolution and a project of con- 
vention on Pan American Union. 

Committee II, Public International 
Law — One of the most important proj- 
ects approved by this committee is the 
resolution condemning war as an instru- 
ment of national policy and calling a con- 
ference in Washington within a year to 




draft treaties for obligatory arbitration 
and also treaties for conciliation. 

A full report on the subject of public 
international law will be submitted at a 
later date. 

Committee III, Private International 
Law. — This delegation refrained from 
voting. This committee adopted resolu- 
tions as follows : Eecommends adoption 
of uniform laws on bills of exchange and 
other credit instruments based on Hague 
rules of 1912; recommends an inter- Amer- 
ican commission for the study of the civil 
and political equality of women; recom- 
mends commercial arbitration as set forth 
by Fifth Conference; recommends strict 
legislation to facilitate organization of 
stock companies; provides for continua- 
tion of the commission of jurists of Eio 
de Janeiro. 

Resolution for Congress on Roads Was Adopted 

Committee IV, Communications. — 
This committee adopted a convention on 
commercial aviation and resolutions as 
follows: The holding of a congress on 
roads next July, at Rio de Janeiro ; recom- 
mends to the States that signed the elec- 
trical communication convention of Mex- 
ico and the Radio Telegraph Convention 
at Washington consideration and ratifi- 
cation of them by the respective govern- 
ments; recommends that the Pan Amer- 
ican Union call an expert committee to 
study the establishment of additional 
steamship facilities between American 
States and the elimination of unnecessary 
port formalities ; recommends the study of 
the rivers of the Americas with a view of 
their navigability; recommends to the 
States which have not done so to complete 
Pan American railway along Andean route 
and expresses gratitude to the Pan Amer- 
ican Railway Commission in Washington; 
recommends a subcommittee to the Pan 
American Railway Committee for the 
study of the facilitation of railway traffic ; 
recommends that inter-American steam- 
ship lines have their steamers stop at the 
ports of the West Indies and Central 
America; recommends construction of an 
inter- American highway ; expresses warm- 
est sympathy for a civil aviation interna- 
tional conference, to be held in Washing- 
ton next December; recommends to the 

next road conference the study of a longi- 
tudinal highway. 

Committee V, Intellectual Co-operation, 
approved projects as follows : Urges peri- 
odic conferences of journalists, with cer- 
tain recoromendations and another reso- 
lution giving additional recommendations 
for this agenda by Mexican delegation; 
recommends lowering of mail and cus- 
toms tariffs on books and periodicals; 
urges publication of geodetic, geological, 
and agricultural maps ; charges Pan Amer- 
ican Union with calling of a bibliographic 
congress and completion and publication 
of Cuervo dictionary by subscription; 
urges interchange of professors and stu- 
dents, establishment of scholarships, the 
establishment of special chairs for the 
study of Spanish, English and Portuguese 
and the establishment of special depart- 
ments for the study of commercial legisla- 
tion in the American republics, all of 
which is to be under the supervision of 
an inter- American intellectual institute; 
urges that technical study be given to 
the matters on the agenda of future con- 
ferences dealing with treaties; urges su- 
pervision over production and distribution 
of moving-picture films; urges instruction 
in financial and economic subjects in 
American States; urges laws for the pen- 
sioning of journalists. 

Two conventions were also adopted by 
this committee: 1. Modifying the pres- 
ent copyright convention. 2. The estab- 
lishment of a geographic institute. 

Committee VI, Economic Problems, ap- 
proved projects as follows : Conclusion of 
the Pan American Commission on con- 
sular procedure and recommends a second 
meeting thereof; recommends that Pan 
American Commercial Conference shall 
devote special study to developing relations 
among commercial organizations of Amer- 
ican States (chambers of commerce) ; ab- 
stains from complete study of immigra- 
tion, in view of approaching conference 
on this subject, but states certain prin- 
ciples, the American delegation making 
the reservation "immigration is a matter 
of purely domestic concern." Resolution 
on trade-marks provides for a conference 
at a time and date to be fixed by Pan 
American Union. Owing to lack of data, 
uniformity of communication statistics 




was referred by resolution to Pan Ameri- 
can Union, to be dealt with by an expert 
committee. Resolution recommends a 
third standardization conference, with pre- 
paratory data to be furnished by Inter- 
American High Commission. Two reso- 
lutions urging the continued study of the 
decimal metric system, a resolution rec- 
ommending continental agricultural co- 
operation and the holding of a conference 
on this subject, and a resolution recom- 
mending the study of a common American 

Committee VII, Social Problems, 
adopted resolutions as follows : 

1. Eecommends ratification of the Pan 
American sanitary code by those countries 
that have not yet ratified. 

2. Continued application of the prin- 
ciples and procedures in public health ad- 
ministration, in view of the benefit already 
derived from their application. 

3. The formation of capable sanitary 
personnel through (A) training in special 
schools and (B) the formation of a pro- 
fessional sanitary organization whose offi- 
cers will be entitled to promotion on merit, 
fixed tenure of office, and retirement on 

4. The Ninth Pan American Sanitary 
Conference to establish general bases for 
the training and formation of the sani- 
tary personnel previously mentioned. 

5. Requests that governments send tech- 
nical advisers to future conferences. 

6. Requests governments to send re- 
ports on progress achieved in public health 
since previous conferences. 

7. When specialized sanitary personnel 
are created, a corps of graduated and reg- 
istered public health visiting nurses should 
be included and unqualified personnel 
should not be employed. 

8. Recommends establishment of inter- 
changes of specialists in public health be- 
tween countries. 

9. Recommends that the Pan American 
Sanitary Bureau study types and stand- 
ards used in their preparation of biologic 
products, so that the Ninth Pan American 
Sanitary Conference may attempt to ob- 
tain uniformity in their preparation. 

10. Recommends that the Pan Ameri- 
can Sanitary Bureau make known the 
fact that a Spanish edition of the 10th 

revision of the United States Pharmaco- 
poeia is now available. 

11. Takes note of the conclusions of the 
first Pan American Conference on Eugen- 
ics and Homoculture and recommends 
that the various countries study and apply 
such portions as they may deem conveni- 

12. Requests the Ninth Pan American 
Sanitary Conference and the Second 
Pan American Conference in Eugenics 
and Homoculture to study the best 
method of combining their functions and 
authorizes the office of eugenics and homo- 
culture to continue to function in the 

13. Urges those American countries 
that have no technical representatives for 
the examination of emigrants in their 
country to begin to utilize the services 
of representatives of other countries. 

14. Takes note of conclusion of First 
Pan American Conference of Representa- 
tives of Public Health Services. 

15. Recommends that future confer- 
ences of representatives of health services 
deal preferentially with interchange of 
experiences and ideas relative to sanita- 
tion on account of the value of such inter- 
changes and of their utility in preparing 
program for future sanitary conferences. 

16. Recommends that an official repre- 
sentative of the Pan American Sanitary 
Bureau attend future conferences of pub- 
lic health representatives. 

17. Calls attention to importance of 
work performed by the Pan American Red 

18. Expresses pleasure at results ob- 
tained from Pan American Red Cross con- 
ferences of 1923 and 1926 and recom- 
mends that American governments lend 
their aid to the Third Pan American Red 
Cross Conference, to be held in Rio de 

19. Recommends that the Pan Ameri- 
can Union continue to co-operate with the 
Red Cross in America. 

Committee VIII, Reports and Treaties. 
— The reports of action taken by States on 
matters approved at past conferences have 
been submitted, but are not published. 

Committee IX, Initiative. — The site of 
the next conference is Montevideo. 

In addition to the above projects, there 




were adopted at plenary sessions resolu- 
tion as follows: Eecommending the im- 
provement of the standard of living of 
laborers and the inclusion of this subject 
on the agenda of the next conference; 
recommending laws for compulsory leave 
of absence for women forty days before 
and after childbirth and certain memo- 
rial resolutions. 

Parley Ends in Harmony 

Dr. L. S. Rowe, in a statement after 
the close of the conference, said: 

The Sixth International Conference of 
American States, which adjourned today, 
will go down in history as in many x'espects 
the most significant, as well as the most 
fruitful of the series of conferences inaugu- 
rates by the first conference, held at Wash- 
ington in 1889. 

None of the preceding conferences has had 
as varied a program nor have the programs 
included so many important questions closely 
affecting the larger interests of all the re- 
publics of the American continent. It is a 
significant fact that in each and every one 
of the questions included in the program 
of the present conference important and con- 
structive forward steps have been talsen. 

As regards the Pan American Union, the 
fact that unanimous agreement was reached 
in the formulation of a convention is in itself 
an indication of the importance which the 
American republics attach to the Pan Amer- 
ican Union. This convention places the 
Union on a firmer basis than it has ever 
before occupied. 

Pan-Americanism Strengthened 

Furthermore, the discussions in the con- 
ference relative to the organization and func- 
tions of the Pan-American Union indicated 
the deep interest of all the republics in the 
development of the fimctions of the Union 
and in the strengthening of its position as 
the oflScial international organization of the 
American republics. 

The decision of the conference not to en- 
trust political functions to the Union will 
serve to enlarge the Union's iisefulness in 
the field of commercial, educational and cul- 
tural co-operation between the republics of 

America, for it will remove any misgivings 
that may have existed that the Union will 
interfere with the sovereignty of the con- 
stituent States. 

In the domain of public and private Inter- 
national law the conference made important 
steps forward. The acceptance by the dele- 
gations of twenty States of the code of pri- 
vate international law prepared by Dr. An- 
tonio S. De Bustamente is a step of deep 
significance to the future of Pan American 

The greatest triumph of the conference in 
the field of public international law is the 
resolution, unanimously adopted, providing 
that disputes of a judicial nature be submit- 
ted to arbitration, and that a conference of 
the American republics be held in Washing- 
ton within twelve months for the negotiation 
of a convention to render obligatory arbitra- 
tion effective. 

A further resolution of great importance, 
also unanimously adopted, outlaws aggres- 
sive war and commits the republics of 
America to the use of peaceable means for 
the settlement of all disputes that may arise 
between them. 

Law Code and Aviation Compact 
The codification of international law for 
the American republics has begim and the 
sixth conference has been able to prepare 
and agree upon conventions dealing with 
public international law on: 

1. The rights of asylum. 

2. Duties of neutrals in civil strife. 

3. Maritime neutrality. 

4. Treaties. 

5. Diplomatic agents. 

6. Consular agents. 

7. Status of foreigners. 

The signing of a convention on commer- 
cial aviation and the action taken on the 
Pan-American Railway and on the Pan- 
American Highway constitute real achieve- 
ments in the field of communications. 

The program of the conference was also 
carried forward in the field of cultural rela- 
tions. The establishment of a geographical 
institute and of a Pan-American Institute of 
Intellectual Co-operation will mean much to 
the development of better understanding be- 
tween the nations of America. 

Extension of Sanitation Code 
In the field of social problems, the unani- 
mous purpose to give the Pan-American 




Sanitary Code full effect in all the republics 
of the American continents carries with it 
the possibility of far-reaching results in the 
field of public sanitation, especially the pos- 
sibility of Pan-American co-operation in this 
important matter. 

The full significance of the results of the 
conference will become fully apparent when 
the conventions and resolutions are made 
effective, and in this respect a large respon- 
sibility will devolve on the Pan-American 

Too great praise cannot be given to the 
Cuban Government and officials entrusted 
with the organization of the conference. 
They have spared no effort. The distin- 
guished President, Dr. Bustamente, and the 
Secretary General, Dr. Carbonell, have 
placed the entire continent under obligations 
to them for the admirable manner in which 
they conducted the work of the conference. 

Due praise also goes to every member of 
the delegation of Cuba, and especially to Dr. 
Ferrara, for his constant and unfailing co- 
operation with the delegations from the 
other countries. 

Bustamente Lauds Progress Made 

The farewell exercises and speeches of the 
Sixth Pan-American Conference occupied the 
final session. Dr. Antonio Bustamente, Presi- 
dent of the conference, in the name of the 
Cuban Government, bade Godspeed to the 

Dr. Bustamente reviewed the work ac- 
complished by the considerable progress in 
the codification of international, private, and 
public law, better organization in the Pan- 
American Union, giving it a strictly con- 
tractual form, remarkable progress in plans 
for aerial, land, and maritime communica- 
tion, most fruitful efforts for intellectual co- 
operation and the advancement and the 
solution of numerous economic, social, and 
sanitary problems. 

We convert international law, which for 
many years was the law of war, into an in- 
strument of good works, of solidarity, 
equally preoccupied with individuals and na- 
tions, which operates intensely for the hap- 
piness of both — to make the latter prosper- 
ous and great and the former cultivated and 

The decision to hold the activities by the 
conference in public, he said, gave the gath- 

ering an enormous prestige by allowing the 
public opinion of America to follow the de- 

He also congratulated the conference for 
having allowed the women to make their 
voice heard in favor of equal rights. America, 
he said, owes a special debt to women, since 
it was a woman, Isabella of Spain, who en- 
abled Columbus to em^bark on his voyage 
of discovery. 

Varela Stresses Reconciliation 

Upon Jacobo Varela, of Uruguay, as the 
representative of the country where the next 
Pan-American Conference will be held, fell 
the honor of replying to Dr. Bustamente in 
the name of the governments which had been 
the guests of Cuba. 

The chief function of Pan-Americanism, he 
said, was "to reconcile the magnificent civili- 
zation" which is flourishing under the Stars 
and Stripes and "the other civilization so 
characteristic of twenty republics" which 
perpetuate Hispanic traditions. 

"To say that everything joins the United 
States and Latin America and nothing sepa- 
rates them," said Seuor Varela, "would only 
create deep misunderstandings or danger- 
ous prejudices. 

The Americas have much in common, es- 
pecially in democratic principles and com- 
mercial and financial intercourse and tradi- 
tional policy regarding the rest of the world, 
which one republic enunciated and many 
lauded. But important interests and for- 
malities hold back perfect harmony and col- 

Tribute to the United States 

More than mere stock, different tempera- 
ments, a different intellectual outlook, those 
economic interests which remain apart, and, 
above all, language, are diverging forces 
which only come together when the abyss of 
misunderstanding which still exists in im- 
portant sections of public opinion in the 
North and South shall be conquered. 

The highest aim of the Pan-American 
Conference, Seiior Varela added, was to "pro- 
mote a better understanding for a fuller 
knowledge of the cultural and moral worth 
of both civilizations and for dispassionate 
examination and comparison of their inter- 
ests and aspirations in an effort to reconcile 
them, in a spirit of harmony, and not in- 




"The United States," he continued, "is not 
only a marvel of industrial organization, an 
Eldorado which its citizens knew how to 
conquer, but a prodigious country, which 
gave to the world a model of free institu- 
tions, which later even made objects speak, 
through the genius of Edison, and sent with 
wings, which the Wright brothers created, 
Lindbergh to conquer the heart of France 
and Europe." 

Argentina Declared for Unity 
Dr. Laurentino Olascoaga, who succeeded 
to the leadership of the Argentine delegation 
during the last few days, after the resigna- 
tion of Dr. Honario Pueyrredon, gave a 
short address, in which he said his country 
came to Havana "to unify itself with the 
majority of American thought without with- 
holding its convictions, which were declared 
at all times with the high respect due the 
(pinions of other delegates." 


ON PEBKUARY 20 the newly formed 
Security Committee of the League 
of Nations met at Geneva under the pres- 
idency of its chairman, Dr. Benesh. Some 
time prior to the meeting of the commit- 
tee, Dr. Benesh sent to all interested gov- 
ernments a questionnaire, in which he re- 
quested their views on the whole problem. 
Important replies were received from the 
British and the German governments, 
summaries of which are given below, to- 
gether with French comments on each re- 


British Policy on Arbitration Treaties 

In the British memorandum, the prin- 
ciple is laid down that arbitration treaties 
in general have no sanction but public 
opinion. The rendering of a decision is 
not so important as the acceptance and 
execution of it ; and the times hardly seem 
to be ripe for any general system of sanc- 
tions for the enforcement of arbitration 
treaties. Moreover, in such conventions 
there is always need for reservations. The 
imitations may vary in form but their 
existence indicates consciousness on the 
part of governments that there is a point 
beyond which they cannot count on their 
peoples giving effect to the obligations of 
the treaty. Article XIII of the Covenant, 

indeed, recognizes such limits. By it the 
members of the League accept in princi- 
ple, but not definitely, the obligation to 
arbitrate justiciable disputes. 

There are two lines along which prog- 
ress appears possible to the British Gov- 
ernment. Already there is a clause in sev- 
eral British treaties binding the signa- 
tories to arbitrate their disputes which 
may arise in interpreting their clauses. 
The time is considered ripe for investi- 
gating whether this obligation could not 
be extended further and made to include 
agreements "of a nontechnical character." 
The second method would be by widening 
the scope of agreements dealing with jus- 
ticiable disputes generally and pledging 
the parties in advance to submit such dis- 
putes to arbitration. 

It is also the opinion of the government 
that the time may have come to re-ex- 
amine the formula as to "vital interests, 
honor, independence, and the interests of 
third States," which, first adopted a quar- 
ter of a century ago, has limited the scope 
of several arbitration treaties. At the 
same time no State can agree to the sub- 
mission to an international tribunal of 
matters falling within the range of its 
national sovereignty. Instances are also 
cited of disputes that have arisen where 
a mere decision on the point of law would 
not settle the case. 

British Attitude Toward the "Optional Clanse" 

The reasons why the British Govern- 
ment does not see its way to sign the "op- 
tional clause" (Article XXXVI) of the 
statute of the Permanent Court at The 
Hague are again noted. It is explained 
that in contracting an international obli- 
gation towards another State a country 
must take into account the nature of its 
general relations with that State ; and ob- 
ligations which it may be ready to as- 
sume with one country may not be pos- 
sible with another. Therefore the British 
Government holds that more progress is 
likely to be achieved through bilateral 
agreements than through general treaties. 
The British Government is "profoundly 
in sympathy" with the system of concil- 
iation commissions. They are especially 
recommended for the settlement of non- 
justiciable disputes. During the Locarno 




Conference the Powers found that Ar- 
ticle XV of the Covenant satisfactorily 
expressed their views in this respect. 

The distinction insisted upon between 
justiciable and non-justiciable disputes. 
Disputes which, being non-justiciable, are 
brought before a Conciliation Commis- 
sion should not be carried to the Perma- 
nent Court at The Hague, even if no 
agreement were reached before the com- 
mission, for the two bodies are qualified 
to deal witli different types of dispute. 
The doubt is expressed whether many 
States will be found ready to accept the 
form of treaty proposed to the Assembly 
by Dr. Nansen, which would invest a body 
of arbitrators with power to deliver bind- 
ing decisions in non- justiciable disputes. 

British Interpretation of Locarno Agreement 

Turning from arbitration more specifi- 
cally to security, the terms of the Locarno 
Agreement are examined and interpreted, 
and the opinion is expressed that this 
treaty, with its clear definition of a spe- 
cific danger and the character of the meas- 
ures which may be taken to meet it, is 
"the ideal type of security agreement." 
It knits together the nations most immedi- 
ately concerned and whose differences 
might lead to a renewal of strife. In a 
region where the particular interests of 
the British Government are concerned it 
has given its formal guarantee to support 
the League's judgment — if necessary by 
force — in the event of an act of aggres- 
sion being committed in defiance of the 
treaty and of the covenant and the Brit- 
ish Government looks forward to the 
growth of this system. For such agree- 
ments may undoubtedly be a contribution 
to security in proportion as they relieve 
the anxiety of the States which conclude 

British Interpretation of Articles of the 

The memorandum contains an impor- 
tant passage defining the obligations of Ar- 
ticle X of the Covenant as interpreted by 
the British Government. It is recalled 
that the Fourth Assembly of the League 
adopted an interpretive resolution with one 
adverse vote, and it is remarked that this 
interpretation is generally regarded as ac- 
cepted, in spite of the lack of formal una- 

nimity; it is, at any rate, "in harmony 
with the view of His Majesty's Govern- 
ment in Great Britain." The interpreta- 
tion referred to laid down that, in regard 
to the preservation of the territorial in- 
tegrity and political independence of a 
country against whom an aggression had 
been committed, the Council should be 
bound to take account of the "geographi- 
cal situation and of the special conditions 
of each State" in recommending the appli- 
cation of military measures ; and also that 
it was of the constitutional authorities of 
each State to decide "in what degree it was 
bound to assure the execution of this ob- 
ligation by employment of its military 

Similarly, Article XI is declared to be 
"a valuable guide" rather than a precise 
definition of obligations. This view, it 
may be said, was that which was approved 
by a committee of the Council and adopted 
by the Eighth Assembly. 

Proceeding to Article XVI of the Cove- 
nant, the interpretation is recalled which 
was placed upon it in the collective note 
addressed to the German representatives 
by the other Locarno powers at the time 
of the signature of the treaty, according 
to which it was understood that each mem- 
ber was bound to co-operate loyally in sup- 
port of the covenant and in resistance to 
aggression "to an extent which is com- 
patible with its military situation and 
takes its geographical position into ac- 

In conclusion, the British Government 
is opposed to the application of hard and 
fast rules to the interpretation of articles 
of the Covenant. The strength of the Cov- 
enant is held to lie "in the measure of 
discretion which it allows to the Council 
and the Assembly in dealing with future 
contingencies which may have no paral- 
lel in history." Similarly, it is resolutely 
opposed to any attempt to define the ag- 
gressor. The objections are made clear by 
quotation from Sir Austen Chamberlain's 
speech in the House of Commons on No- 
vember 24, 1927, when he said that if 
"strict rules" were made it would be pos- 
sible that "by some unhappy turn in your 
definition" "the aggressed and not the of- 
fender" might be declared to be the ag- 
gressor. Definition, in fact, might prove to 




be "a trap for the innocent and a sign- 
post for the guilty." 

It may be noted that the British Govern- 
ment is called throughout the memoran- 
dum "His Majesty's Government in Great 

German Memorandum of General Nature 

The German memorandum is an ex- 
pose of a general nature which avoids con- 
crete proposals for the solution of indi- 
vidual problems. By implication it repu- 
diates the Geneva Protocol, which, as far 
as Germany is concerned, may be consid- 
ered dead and buried at last. 

The "essence of the problem of security 
is the avoidance of warlike complications," 
and what is needed is a solution for "all 
conflicts which have hitherto been the 
cause of wars." Every other solution must 
remain artificial and without real founda- 
tion. The memorandum accepts the op- 
tional clause of the Permanent Hague 
Court as offering "a satisfactory possibil- 
ity" for the settlement of "all disputes" 
of a judicial nature. It will be the task 
of the League Security Committee to find 
means of inducing more States to accept 
this clause. 

Settlement of Non-justiciable Disputes Empha- 
sized By Germany 

The settlement of non-justiciable dis- 
putes — that is to say, of political disputes 
— ^is "of the highest importance," and the 
German Government " is convinced that 
in this respect there are possibilities that 
have not been utilized hitherto." It will 
be the committee's task to try and discover 
a procedure that will provide "an easy 
and peaceful solution to all conceivable 
disputes without exception." The idea 
that disputes of a purely political nature 
can be settled by the obligatory procedure 
of an arbitration court "is not practicable 
in present circumstances," but some ap- 
proach to this idea is possible if methods 
of procedure are adopted that "as good as 
secure the settlement of disputes in actual 
practice" while "taking into account the 
legitimate requirements of national life 
and development." 

The memorandum urges that the idea 
of mediation, either by the League Coun- 
cil or by some other authority, be further 
developed. Such a system could be in- 

corporated in treaties between two States 
as well as in treaties between several 
States. Bilateral treaties would gain if 
they could be brought "into organic con- 
nection" with the authoritative bodies con- 
stituted by the League. The value of such 
systems does not invariably depend "on 
special measures guaranteeing the agree- 
ment embraced by them." If those bodies 
constituted to settled disputes "are pro- 
vided with adequate authority," it can 
'Tiardly be assumed that a State would 
dare to override its decisions." 

"Sanctions" Condemned by German 

In this important passage the German 
memorandum expresses its skepticism with 
regard to the universal value of sanctions 
(penalties). Indeed, the whole memoran- 
dum is a criticism of the rigid system of 
sanctions like the Geneva Protocol. The 
memorandum states categorically that in 
case peaceful means are not adequate the 
League Covenant, with its clauses "relat- 
ing to the prevention of war and com- 
bating breaches of the peace, is available" 
and it is "the task of the League Council 
to prevent a dispute from driving the in- 
terested powers to an appeal to arms." 

The study of Article 11 of the Covenant 
"leads to the elaboration of the number 
of practical proposals which could be sup- 
plemented by voluntary obligations such 
as have already been undertaken in the 
Locarno Agreement." All these measures 
will, of course, be rendered much more 
effective by general disarmament, "which 
in itself contains one of the most essen- 
tial elements of security." 

A general action by all members of the 
League in case of a breach of the peace 
is not possible at present because gen- 
eral disarmament is still outstanding. Ke- 
gional agreements that take into account 
the security of special districts can act 
as substitutes, but such agreements must 
be voluntary, although they must not con- 
flict with the interests of the non-partici- 
pating States. 

The security of one must not be achieved 
at the cost of another's insecurity. This 
condition is fulfilled by the Locarno Agree- 
ment, whereas "the formation of allied 
groups within tbe Ijeague of Nations" 
may easily lead to "a split in the League" 




and "paralyze all common action in times 
of crisis." The memorandum emphasizes 
the fact that security must proceed from 
the peaceful treatment of all conflicts and 
not from sanctions or warlike measures, 
which would be like "building the roof 
first and the house afterwards." 

French Reaction to British and German 

The British memorandum was not well 
received in the French press. The semi- 
officia Temps argued, in its comments, 
that the British attitude is an insur- 
mountable obstacle to the attainment of 
"any general formula of security that 
would permit a reduction of armaments." 

The Temps further maintains that it is 
sheer illusion to suppose that the advent 
of a new government in Great Britain, 
even a Labor Government, would bring 
any essential change. "Whatever party 
the men in power in London may belong 
to, they are all alike absolutely obliged 
to take account of the particular interests 
of the British Empire. The experiment 
of Mr. Ramsay MacDonald's Labor Cabi- 
net is conclusive in that respect." 

M. Jacques Bainville, writing in Action 
Frangaise, considers that as Great Britain 
is purely a naval power, her contributory 
value to European security or to the ap- 
plication of League sanctions is nullified 
by the United States. He says: 

If England refuses to tie her hands or sign 
a blank check, it is not merely because of her 
tradition of splendid isolation nor because of 
her sacred egoism. The knot of the crucial 
problem is to be found in the phrase "free- 
dom of the seas." If the American Senate 
disavowed President Wilson it was because 
he had yielded to Mr. Lloyd George on this 
question. If, after the failure of the Ge- 
neva Conference for the limitation of cruis- 
ers, President Coolidge announces the con- 
struction of an armada it must be under- 
stood as meaning simply this — that one of 
the greatest naval powers in the world in- 
tends to declare that in the future Great 
Britain must, like any other coimtry, re- 
nounce the right of blockade or fight if she 
means to keep it. 

Now, if the worst came to the worst, 
Great Britain might well fight to preserve 
this arm of blockade for her personal de- 
fense. It is imlikely that she would enter 

into conflict with the United States in order 
to use the right of blockade as a sanction 
on behalf of the League of Nations and for 
the benefit of other countries. 

The German memorandum was better 
received in Paris than the British. Even 
the Temps stated that the spirit of the 
memorandum is conciliatory, and that it 
puts forward certain principles, especially 
concerning arbitration, that merit the at- 
tention of the committee. The paper 
noted, not without a certain satisfaction, 
that on the question of arbitration there 
is great dilference between the British and 
German points of view, and that the Ger- 
man memorandum goes further in this 
matter than any other. 

On the other hand, the French press 
maintains that the German point of view 
differs profoundly from the French, es- 
pecially on the question of security, and 
is, in fact, as incompatible with the prin- 
ciples of the Geneva Protocol as is the 

Swedish Suggestion of a General Locarno 

The Swedish Government, in a memo- 
randum addressed to the League, has 
taken the view that the League Assem- 
bly, in its instructions on the subject of 
security, had contemplated an extension of 
arbitration procedure on the principles 
already established by special agreements. 
The Swedish Government expresses the 
opinion that the simplest way of effecting 
this purpose would be to draw up a draft 
collective agreement, based so far as pos- 
sible on the four Locarno agreements on 
arbitration and conciliation. The contents 
of these agreements may be summarized 
as follows : 

Disputes with regard to which the par- 
ties are in conflict as to their respective 
rights are submitted for decision to the 
Permanent Court of International Justice 
or an arbitral tribunal. Other disputes 
must, at the request of either of the par- 
ties, be submitted, with a view to amica- 
ble settlement, to a permanent concilia- 
tion commission, and, if agreement is not 
reached before that body, to the Council 
of the League for settlement in accord- 
ance with Article XV of the Covenant. If 
the parties agree thereto, disputes of a 
legal nature may also be submitted to the 




Permanent Conciliation Commission be- 
fore any resort is made to procedure be- 
fore the Permanent Court of International 
Justice or to arbitral procedure. 

Similar provisions having been adopted 
for the settlement of international dis- 
putes in a large number of special agree- 
ments, the Swedish Government is, there- 
fore, convinced that it would be desirable 
to give this type of agreement a more gen- 
eral form, as contemplated in the instruc- 
tions received from the Assembly. The 
Swedish Government accordingly submits 
a draft convention based upon these prin- 
ciples. In so doing it points out that the 
advantages to be derived from a more gen- 
eral application of the provisions con- 
tained in the Locarno agreements consist, 
first, in the fact that these provisions 
afford appropriate methods for the settle- 
ment of the various classes of international 
disputes, seeing that disputes so handled 
would not, as a rule, be submitted to the 
Council of the League of Nations until 
they had been carefully and impartially 
investigated by a Conciliation Commis- 
sion. When examining the matter afresh, 
the Council would thus be in a better 
position to devise the most appropriate 
solution and to put forward unanimous 
proposals for a settlement. 

Another argument is also advanced in 
favor of the extension of arbitral proced- 
ure. It is that, when a dispute is investi- 
gated by the Council, there is always some 
risk that that body may fail to reach una- 
nimity, and that the States members of 
the League may consequently reserve "the 
right to take such action as they shall con- 
sider necessary for the maintenance of 
right and justice." The reference of a 
dispute to a tribunal, on the other hand, 
secures the final settlement of the legal 
points at issue. 


ON JANUAEY 19 the French Cham- 
ber of Deputies passed the Army Ee- 
cruiting Bill, which provides for the re- 
duction of conscripted military service to 
one year. Prior to the passage of the bill 
a sharp conflict arose between the Army 
Committee of the Chamber and the Min- 
ister of War, M. Painleve. In the original 

bill, as introduced by the government, the 
question of the date at which the new 
term of recruitment was to be introduced 
was left open. The committee demanded 
the fixing of the date in the bill itself 
and won its point. 

M. Painleve declared in his statement 
before the committee that he could not 
consent to the introduction which the 
committee had made into Article 102 of 
the recruiting measure of a definite date 
for the reduction of the period of service 
for conscripts to one year, and that it was 
impossible to foresee at present when the 
rate of recruitment of regular soldiers and 
of men for the auxiliary services would 
allow the one-year period to be put into 
force. If the committee stipulated that 
the class which would be called up in May, 
1929, should be released in May, 1930, 
it would force Parliament to commit it- 
self to a possible weakening of national 
defense. M. Painleve said that the Gov- 
ernment intended to use all its authority 
in support of the original text of the 
measure, which fixed no definite date for 
the reduction of the period of service. He 
insisted that the committee should reserve 
its earlier decision and reconsider the 
matter. This the committee refused to do. 

M. Painleve's argument was strongly 
opposed by the Socialist and Eadical-So- 
cialist members of the committee, who de- 
clared that as the debate on the recruit- 
ing law had been begun the committee 
could not withdraw its decision. They 
said that the fixing of a date was intended 
to hasten the action of the military au- 
thorities in applying the reform, and that 
it was essential, from the electoral point 
of view, to inform the country when this 
change, which was one of the essential 
promises of the present legislature, would 
be made. 

Later on, however, the committee modi- 
fied its position slightly and, as a result, 
the general staff agreed to accept Novem- 
ber 1, 1930, as the date, and this was 
adopted by the government as a new text 
for the bill. It was accompanied by the 
reservation that, if by any mischance and 
against expectation events render this un- 
desirable, the soldiers might be retained 
with the colors for a further period of six 




In the new scheme of defense the back- 
bone of a short-service army is to be pro- 
vided by a professional service of 106,- 
000 men. On them will fall the bylk of 
the highly specialized functions due to 
the ever-increasing technical demands of 
a motorized and mechanized army. These 
men are being sought chiefly through ad- 
vertisement by posters setting forth the 
attractions of the service, and it would 
appear that they are coming forward in 
satisfactory numbers, though trustworthy 
calculations are said to indicate that the 
maximum will not be reached before 1930. 
This is why the military authorities 
sought to extend the period during which 
the new measure is to be introduced. 


A CONFERENCE of the Eeich and 
the Federal States to discuss the 
possibilities of constitutional and admin- 
istrative reform was held in Berlin on 
January 16-18. The conference opened 
under the presidency of Herr Marx, the 
Chancellor, in the historic hall of the 
Chancellor's Palace in the Wilhelmstrasse, 
which has been known as the "Congress 
Hall" since Bismarck presided there, over 
the Congress of Berlin, in 1878. Nearly 
100 persons were present, including all 
the members of the Eeich Cabinet who 
were free to attend; Dr. Saemisch, the 
Eeich Economy Commissioner; Herr 
Braun, the Prussian Premier, and the 
members of his government; and the pre- 
miers and ministers of the Interior and 
Finance of the remaining 17 States. 

Opening Speech by the Chancellor 

In his introductory speech the Chancel- 
lor laid emphasis upon the historic im- 
portance of tlie Congress Hall, recalling 
not only the Congress of Berlin, but the 
fateful gathering of November, 1918, of 
the representatives of the young free 
States to discuss the situation with Fritz 
Ebert, who was shortly to become the first 
President of the Federal Eepublican 
Eeich. In outlining briefly the task of the 
conference, Herr Marx insisted that any 
change in the relations between the Eeich 
and the States must be carried out on 

the basis of complete mutual loyalty. He 
intimated that the contribution of the 
Eeich would be, as was expected, sugges- 
tions for assisting individual States by 
taking over certain branches of adminis- 
tration and for the straightening out of 
interstate frontiers by abolishing with as 
much dispatch as possible the two hundred 
odd enclaves. 

Most of these illogical intrusions of one 
State upon the natural confines of another 
owe their existence to dynastic complica- 
tions of a past era, upon which not even 
the most sentimental Federalist could rea- 
sonably base a claim for their permanence 
in present circumstances. Perhaps the best 
illustration of the manner in which they 
preserve the extravagant administrative 
difl&culties which the conference is engaged 
in eliminating is provided by a road in 
the Harz, which in the course of 60 kilo- 
metres passes through six different States, 
each with its own traffic regulations. An- 
other road in Thuringia crosses State 
frontiers fourteen times in a stretch of 
about six miles. 

Work of the Conference 

The sessions of the conference were 
secret. Its agenda consisted of the fol- 
lowing three points: 

1. Improvements in the relationship be- 
tween Reich and States calculated to reduce 
the overlapping of functions. 

2. Measures to insure the most economical 
conduct possible of public finances. 

3. Administrative reform in Reich and 

The various States brought to it their 
own schemes, which are the result of long 
discussions. The Socialists and the Demo- 
crats desire a highly centralized, unitary 
State. The Nationalists have a plan for 
a return to the Bismarckian structure 
based on Prussia, with the President of 
the Eeich, strengthened in authority, at 
the same time State President of Prus- 
sia, and the Chancellor of the Eeich at 
the same time Premier of Prussia. 

The opposition of the Southern States, 
particularly Bavaria, to any change involv- 
ing a decrease of State sovereignty has 
been expressed in no uncertain terms, es- 
pecially since Herr Luther founded his 
"League for the Eegeneration of the 




Reich," although it should be noted that 
the Bavarian People's Party, as distinct 
from the Bavarian Premier and a number 
of Agrarian leaders, have adopted a not 
unfriendly attitude towards the League, 
which, after aU, was very cautious in 
drafting its program. 

All these conflicting views were voiced 
at the conference. At the end of the meet- 
ing a long and rather vague communique 
was issued. After Herr Held, the Bava- 
rian Premier, had declared categorically 
that Bavaria would "never" enter a uni- 
tary Eeich, however organized, and Herr 
Braun, the Prussian Premier, had chided 
him with showing himself lacking in the 
historical sense, it was not surprising that 
an agreed statement was found difficult of 
achievement, and that it said little when 
it had been achieved. 

Results of the Conference 

Judging by the communique of the con- 
ference, the leading official representatives 
of the Reich and the Federal States could 
not reach general agreement on anything 
more definite than the statement that the 
regulation of relations between Reich and 
States by the Weimar Constitution is un- 
satisfactory and requires fundamental re- 
form. The conference was unable, accord- 
ing to its communique, to agree whether 
the reform should strengthen unitarian or 
Federalistic authority, or whether an 
amalgamation of both in a new form 
would be possible. It did, however, agree 
that a strong Reich authority was neces- 

The conference decided that a partial 
solution would be inadvisable, and it was 
opposed to the absorption of weak States 
by the Reich as "Reich States." The con- 
ference resolved that the Reich must not 
seek to increase its authority by "finan- 
cial undermining" or similar measures to 
the detriment of the States. If small 
States showed a desire to merge themselves 
in larger neighbors, they should be en- 
couraged. The abolition of enclaves by 
voluntary arrangement would be desirable. 
The solution of the problem as a whole 
was to be prepared in the report of the 
special commission, of which the Chan- 
cellor would be the chairman. 

Both the Reich and the State govern- 
ments were agreed on the necessity of 

measures to insure the economical con- 
duct of public finances, and for this pur- 
pose a special finance committee would 
be appointed. All the governments agreed 
to work out schemes of administrative 
reform, especially with a view to the fu- 
sion of overlapping departments and the 
readjustment of local and provincial (but 
not State) boundaries in conformity with 
present-day traffic conditions. In order to 
insure uniformity of method, the State 
governments undertook to submit their 
schemes to the Reich Economy Commis- 
sioner, who would make recommendations 
"if requested." 

It is generally assumed in Berlin that 
the two administrative departments chief- 
ly affected at first by fusion schemes, 
whether between the Reich and individual 
States or between State and State, will be 
those of Finance and Justice. 


THE next act in the drama of fac- 
tional strife in the Russian Commun- 
ist ranks, after the expulsion from the 
Communist Party of all those opposed to 
the present dictator of Russia, Joseph Sta- 
lin, has been the exile, to Siberia and other 
remote portions of the Russian realm, 
of Trotsky and several other prominent 
leaders of the Opposition. The Moscow 
correspondent of the Berliner Tagehlatt, 
in describing Trotsky's departure from 
Moscow, says that the deposed Communist 
leader arrived at the railroad station 
shortly before the train was due to start, 
closely guarded by political police. A 
large crowd, which had gathered to watch 
his arrival, greeted him with cheers and 
the singing of the International. There 
was little opportunity for Trotsky to re- 
ply, even if he had wished to do so; it 
was noticeable, however, that the police 
made no particular attempt to prevent 
him from speaking. As the train moved 
out, the crowd raised cheers for the Com- 
munist Party, the Communist Interna- 
tional, and the Soviet Republic. Trot- 
sky's bearing as he began his long journey 
to Viernyi, the remote place on the fron- 
tier between Russian Turkestan and 
China, which has been chosen for his ex- 
ile, was dignified, but he looked rather 




pale. On the previous evening Eadek and 
several other Opposition leaders were sent 
from Moscow to unknown destinations in 
the eastern Urals. A large crowd assem- 
bled on this occasion also. 

Official Soviet Statement 
In connection with the exile of the Op- 
position leaders the official Soviet news 
agency has issued the following state- 

The Soviet governmental organs have es- 
tablished that a number of persons adhering 
to the Opposition groups of Trotskyists and 
Sapronovists, which were expelled from 
the party by the Fifteenth Congress of the 
Communist Party of the Soviet Republic 
immediately after the congress and after the 
disintegration of the Opposition bloc devel- 
oped illegal anti-Soviet activities, namely at- 
tempts to create a secret organization to pre- 
pare a series of anti-Soviet actions and to 
establish close contact with representatives 
in Moscow of foreign bourgeoisie, by whom 
the Trotskyists transmitted malignantly false 
information to other countries and estab- 
lished connections with their supporters 

In view of these facts, it has been recog- 
nized as a necessary measure for the ensur- 
ing of the interests of the proletarian State 
to deport from Moscow 30 active members of 
these groups, including Trotsky, Ivan Smin- 
nov, Serebriakov, Radek, MJuralov, Beloboro- 
dov, Sapronov, Vladimir Smirnov, Kha- 
retchko, Smilga, Vardin, Safarov, Sonovsky, 
and others. A number of other persons, in- 
cluding Rakovsky, Boguslavsky and Drobnis, 
have been enjoined to leave Moscow. 

As regards Zinoviev, Kamenev, and others 
who have left the Opposition bloc, in view 
of their declaration to submit to all condi- 
tion and decisions of the Fifteenth Congress 
they have been sent by the party organiza- 
tions to take up work in the provinces. 

Exiles' Appeal to the Communist International 

Just before their banishment, Trotsky, 
Eakovsky, Radek, Smilga, Smirnov, and 
several others of the exiled Opposition 
leaders addressed an appeal to the Com- 
munist International, which is about to 
convene its Sixth Congress. The appeal 
begins : 

We, the undersigned, expelled from the 
Russian Communits Party in connection with 

the decisions of the fifteen conference of our 
party, held it to be necessary to appeal 
against this decision to the Sixth Congress 
of the Comintern. But by order of the Ogpu 
(Cheka) we, old Bolshevist Party worke"rs, 
are being banished to the most distant ter- 
ritories of the Union without any charges 
being brought against us, with the sole pur- 
pose of severing our communications with 
Moscow and other labor centers, and conse- 
quently also with the Sixth Congress. 

They, therefore, decided on the eve of 
their departure to address this appeal to 
the Comintern Executive, with the request 
that it be brought to the notice of the 
central committees of all Communist par- 

The Opposition leaders then enter upon 
a long defense and explanation of their 
policy and conduct. The domestic strife 
which has led to their exclusion from the 
party is, they say, the result of their try- 
ing to express their views. Under Lenin 
it could not have arisen, because disputes 
were then threshed out thoroughly in pub- 
lic. The present system, they argue, will 
prove fatal to the Comintern and to the 
international proletarian movement, which 
cannot afford to dispense with experienced 
revolutionary leaders. 

Because they were deprived of their 
normal right to place their views before 
the party conference they were driven to 
make use of a State printing press inde- 
pendently, and at the jubilee demonstra- 
tion they carried posters calling attention 
to the dangers of the "JSTepmen" (private 
traders), Kulaki (well-to-do peasants), 
and bureaucrats, and the departure from 
pure Leninism. If the parties of the 
Comintern have had no means of judging 
properly the historical importance of the 
Opposition in the Russian Communist 
Party, the bourgeoisie of the world had al- 
ready delivered its unambiguous judg- 
ment. All serious bourgeois organs in all 
countries regard the Russian Communist 
Opposition as their deadly foe, and, on the 
other hand, look upon the policy of the 
present controlling majority in Soviet 
Russia as a necessary stage in the transi- 
tion of the U. S. S. R. to the ways of the 
"civilized" — that is to say, capitalistic — 
world. The banishment of themselves, 
soldiers of the October Revolution and 




comradas-in-arms of Lenin, was the clear- 
est expression of the class changes which 
liad occurred in Soviet Russia and of the 
adoption by the political controller of a 
policy of opportunism. 

In conclusion, the Opposition leaders, 
who make it clear that they refuse to 
abandon one iota of their program, appeal 
to all Communist parties at the Comin- 

tern Congress to examine thoroughly the 
questions at issue in the broad daylight 
and with the fullest participation of the 
party masses. In the meantime "we bow 
to force and leave the scenes of our party 
and Soviet labore for a senseless and aim- 
less exile. . , . We address to the Sixth 
Congress of the Communist International 
a demand for readmission into the party.*' 


A Little History 

By M. S. GALL 

EAELY in the last century a Congre- 
gational minister, who had seen serv- 
ice in the war of the Revolution, pub- 
lished an epoch-making essay. He was a 
man of remarkable mentality, a devout 
Christian and benign gentleman. The 
essay, published on Christmas day, 1814, 
was called "A Solemn Review of the Cus- 
tom of War." The man was Noah Wor- 
cester, then in his middle fifties, a ripe 
student of ethics and religion, and withal 
a man of tremendous, though quiet, force. 

He recommended in his essay, after 
dealing logically with the intolerable as- 
pects of war, that a confederacy of nations 
and a high court of equity be substituted 
as a method of ironing out international 
difficulties. Then, in order to create a pub- 
lic sentiment which would demand and 
support such methods as a substitute for 
war, he recommended the organization of 
peace societies, the circulation of peace 
literature, the giving of peace sermons 
and addresses. 

After forming, with William Ellery 
Channing, the Massachusetts Peace So- 
ciety, December, 181e5, he issued at in- 
tervals a forty-page pamphlet containing 
arguments for peace instead of war. The 
series was called "The Friend of Peace." 
The first number, appearing in 1816, was 
really a tract, with the title, "Six Letters 
from Omar to the President." Almost im- 
mediately, however, the numbers began to 
contain several shorter articles, and by the 
time Number III came out news items 
were included. Names of the officials of 
the Massachusetts Peace Society and reso- 
lutions passed by that body appeared 

in The Friend of Peace, as well as notices 
and reviews of a few other publications. 

It had become in reality a magazine. A 
volume stretched over several years. 
Volume IV, for instance — the final one — 
contained fourteen numbers and four ap- 
pendix issues, extending over the years 

In the third appendix, appearing in the 
summer of 1828, the fact is recorded that 
on May 8 the American Peace Society had 
been formed. Mr. William Ladd, prime 
mover in organizing this central society, 
had been mentioned previously in the 
Friend of Peace as having formed five 
auxiliaries to the Massachusetts Peace 

Shortly before this time the venerable 
Dr. Worcester had desired, because of age 
and infirmities, to cease publishing his 
magazine, and so stated at a meeting of 
the Massachusetts Peace Society; but fear 
was expressed at that meeting that if this 
periodical were relinquished the cause 
would be left without a means of circulat- 
ing its appeal. At that juncture William 
Ladd solemnly pledged the Society that if 
God spared his life and health there 
should be a peace periodical, whether he 
could get the assistance of others or not. 

In tlie same issue of the Friend of 
Peace that noted the formation of the 
American Peace Society, mention is made 
of the Harbinger of Peace edited by 
William Ladd. It was this "Harbinger of 
Peace" that marked the American Peace 
Society's first eft'orts to publish a monthly 
magazine. The fourth and last appendix 
to the Friend of Peace contains an an- 




nouncement of number five of the Har- 
binger of Peace. "This work," says Dr. 
Worcester, "contains a variety of matter 
adapted to the objects of the Society and 
})romises to be extensively useful, should 
it be encouraged according to its merits." 

Here ended, in 1828, the Friend of 
Peace, quite truly the parent of the Har- 
binger of Peace. 

Beginning with the American Peace 
Society itself and edited by its first Cor- 
responding Secretary, William Ladd, the 
first number of the Harbinger, May, 1828, 
makes the following statement: 

"Though in our official capacity we shall 
leave wholly uutouched the question whether 
war strictly defensive be consistent with 
Christianity, ... we shall lay no such 
restraints on our correspondents and will re- 
ceive with pleasure any well-written essays 
on the great cause, should the writer take 
either side of the question for granted." 

Thus was inaugurated the broad policy 
of working only upon the major prob- 
lem of war as a custom. With few ex- 
ceptions, the same policy as to the right 
of individual decision in specific cases has 
been followed by the twelve editors who 
have succeeded Mr. Ladd. The whole 
system of war as a policy of nations has 
been, itself, the object of attack, and 
many apparently associated subjects have 
repeatedly been refused admission to the 
magazine, in order that the main issue 
be not confused. 

For some time after its beginning, the 
Harbinger was published monthly, its 
volume beginning in May each year. The 
duodecimo, twenty-four page numbers 
had one column to the page and contained 
one leading article, four to six pages long. 
Usually there was also each month a short 
peace address or abridged sermon, fol- 
lowed by anecdotes relating to war, and 
by comments, letters, and news of branch 
societies. There was often a poem on the 
last page, and, once a year, fairly com- 
])lete reports of the annual meeting. 

Since Mr. Ladd, who resided in the 
little town of Minot, Maine, was continu- 
ally traveling about New England and 
New York, preaching peace, his editing 
and writing were done on the ^ving, and 
tlie magazine was printed, sometimes in 

New York, sometimes in Portland or 
Boston, or wherever he chanced to find the 
nearest printer. For two years the peri- 
odical was issued in this "difficult and 
vexatious manner." Yet, selling at ten 
cents a copy, the magazine was circulated 
for a time without pecuniary loss to Mr. 
Ladd, though he received no compensation 
for his services and expenses "except the 
luxury of doing good." 

Then arrangements were made with a 
New York publisher, and all copy was 
mailed to that city. It was a matter of 
some four hundred miles from Minot to 
New York, with irregular semiweekly 
mails; so tliis, too, proved to be an un- 
satisfactory method. Then, in May, 1830, 
liev. L. I). Dewey, living in New York 
city, volunteered to act as assistant editor, 
and to take charge of all subscriptions 
except those from Maine. But even this 
arrangement left so great a burden upon 
Mr. Ladd, so much of whose energy was 
thrown into preaching and organizing, 
that in May, at the close of the third year, 
the first number of the new volume was 
delayed until the directors could reach 
some decision as to the future. 

In June, 1831, therefore, some decided 
changes were made. An editorial board, 
headed by Ladd, was appointed. The 
magazine was enlarged to thirty-two 
octavo pages and the name changed to 
"The Calumet." It was now to be issued 

Mr. Ladd continued to furnish the bulk 
of the material until May, 1833, when, 
two days after the annual meeting of the 
Society, he suifered a slight paralytic 
shock. The directors then, at Mr. Ladd'^s 
earnest request, engaged the part-time 
services of a theological student in New 
York as editor, Mr. E. M. Chipman, soon 
succeeded by Eev. George Bush, who was 
with difficulty persuaded to attempt the 
work. However, after two more issues, 
the Society's slender funds were exhausted 
and the editing of the magazine fell back 
again upon Ladd. 

Mr. Ladd did not entirely approve of 
the editorial policies of the less experi- 
enced editors, and by anonymous contri- 
butions on various topics he tried in the 
last four numbers of Volume TV to coun- 
teract the damage he conceived they had 
done. In Mr. Ladd's reduced state of 




health, however, the continuance of the 
Calumet on the old lines was impossible. 

By that time the Connecticut Peace So- 
ciety, through the enthusiasm and ability 
of William Watson, of Hartford, had be- 
gun, June, 1834, the publication of a 
quarterly called the "American Advocate 
of Peace/' edited by C. S. Henry. The 
Connecticut Society was not then auxili- 
ary to the American Society, and for a 
year the two magazines struggled on side 
by side. Then, feeling that it was "better 
for one periodical to be well supported 
than for two to starve," Mr. Ladd, through 
the exercise of considerable diplomacy, 
succeeded in arranging for the Calumet to 
be united with the American Advocate of 
Peace, to be published in Hartford for the 
American Peace Society. 

Thus arrived the new title, American 
Advocate of Peace, preserved with minor 
changes ever since. Beginning in June, 
1835, therefore, it became the organ of the 
national Society, with Francis Fellowes 
as its editor. It remained a quarterly, 
containing two or more scholarly essays in 
each issue, a number of book reviews, and 
a meager page or two of peace-movement 

At the same time the executive depart- 
ment of the American Peace Society moved 
to Hartford, which now became the head- 
quarters not only of the Connecticut Peace 
Society and the Hartford County Peace 
Society, but of the national Society as 
well. Worthy material for the maga- 
zine began to pour in richly. William 
Ladd continued his labors as general 
agent of the American Peace Society and 
Mr. Watson assumed entire responsibility 
for the magazine. With this division of 
labor, both the Society and the periodical 
flourished better in Hartford than before. 
For a year and a half the magazine went 
out from there to a growing number of 
subscribers and branch society members. 
But William Watson, the mainspring of 
local opeartions in Hartford, died in No- 
vember, 1836. His death dealt a heavy 
blow to the magazine. 

The directors decided that, without Mr. 
Watson, Hartford was not so well adapted 
to the publication of the pamphlets and 
the periodical as was Boston, which 
seemed to them "a sort of moral observa- 
tory and lighthouse to the nation." 

Therefore the headquarters of the Ameri- 
can Peace Society were removed, in May, 
1837, to Boston. 

At its first meeting there, the executive 
committee voted to call the magazine 
simply the "Advocate of Peace," and to 
begin a new series with the June number. 
Mr. Ladd began again to contribute the 
bulk of articles and reports, some signed 
with his own name, some with pen names. 
He was now president of the Society, 
while Mr. George Beckwith was corre- 
sponding secretary and very active as 
an agent. Later the sole editor of the 
magazine, Mr. Beckwith served a valuable 
apprenticeship under Mr. Ladd in the 
committee of publications and for some 
time before Ladd's death as general super- 
intendent of publications. 

At the beginning of the second year in 
Boston, June, 1838, the editor announced 
a prosperous first year, with an edition of 
3,000 copies, distributed for the most part 
to paying subscribers. The expense, how- 
ever, had been heavy. An appeal for more 
subscribers was followed by the announce- 
ment that the magazine would be changed 
from a quarterly to a monthly, the number 
of pages increased one-third, but that the 
price would remain unchanged. 

From 1839 to 1842 the magazine was 
issued rather irregularly. This was due 
partly to lack of adequate funds, partly to 
the effort to work the volumes around so 
that they would begin in January instead 
of June. 

Mr. Ladd, through a period of reduced 
health, had forged on with his arduous 
and sacrificial labor for the Society. He 
died in 1841. The American Peace So- 
ciety and its periodical then found them- 
selves in serious plight. Ladd had often 
carried the greater part of the expenses 
personally, besides contributing his en- 
tire time and services. New workers, 
however, rallied to the support of the 
Society, and its activities went on. 

Mr. Beckwith now took full charge of 
publications. The subject of a congress 
and court of nations, so ably advocated 
by Ladd, continued to be presented in 
the magazine, and Eev. Mr. Coues, who 
succeeded Mr. Ladd as president, fre- 
quently contributed the leading articles. 

It is perhaps worthy of note, in connec- 
tion with M. Briand's proposal in 1937 of 
a treaty outlawing war between France 




and the United States, that the October- 
November number of the Advocate of 
Peace for 1842 contained the following 
paragraph, quoted from William Jay: 

"Supi)ose that in our next treaty with 
i'^ance an article were inserted of the fol- 
lowing import: 'It is agreed between the 
contracting parties that if, unhappily, any 
controversy shall hereafter arise between 
them in respect to the true meaning and in- 
tention of any stipulation in this present 
treaty, or in respect to any other subject 
which controversy cannot be adjusted by 
negotiation, neither party shall resort to hos- 
tilities against the other; but the matter in 
dispute shall, by special convention, be sub- 
mitted to the arbitrament of one or more 
friendly powers; and the parties agree to 
abide by the award which may be given in 
pursuance of such submission'." 

Judge William Jay was the son of 
John Jay, first Chief Justice of the United 
States. He was then a vice-president, 
and later president of the American Peace 
Society, a position which he held through 
the last ten years of his life. 

In January, 1843, the new volume of 
the magazine announced a slight change 
of policy. Shorter articles, more facts 
and statistics, more anecdotes designed to 
interest both old and young, were intro- 
duced. News of foreign and domestic 
peace work became more continuous. The 
number of pages was reduced, and one 
volume covered two years. An edition of 
from 5,000 to 8,000 was distributed, much 
of it gratuitously. 

The account of the first international 
peace congress, in London, June, 1843, 
occupied several numbers. During these 
years, too, it was customary to publish 
frequently lists, not only of the officers of 
the Society, but also, at times, of life 
members and all contributors of funds. 
Such lists have now no little historic value. 

The Society always saw clearly the im- 
portance of its organ as a means of propa- 
ganda for peace, but the production of it 
was often a serious burden. The execu- 
tive committee considered this aspect of 
the case very seriously at its meeting. May 
27, 1845. The combined duties of general 
agent, which meant traveling about, and 
editor, which meant much desk work, 
were an onerous burden to successive sec- 

retaries. At this May meeting, Mr. Amasa 
Walker advised the moving of the maga- 
zine to Worcester and the editing and 
publishing of it there by Mr. Elihu Bur- 
ritt, who had shown great ability and 
resourcefulness in publicity for the cause. 
The matter was considered pro and con, 
and finally, at the November meeting of 
the committee, 1845, it was voted, first, 
"that from January, 1845, we transfer the 
Advocate of Peace into Mr. Burritt's 
hands, to be published entirely on his 
own responsibility" ; second, "that the So- 
ciety take 500 copies at fifty cents each 
per volume and allow Mr Burritt the first 
cost for all the others which the Society 
may need." The Society further retained 
the right of appointing the editor, and for 
the present appointed Mr. Burritt. It 
also retained the right to take back into 
its own hands the conduct of the Advo- 
cate of Peace, upon proper notice and 
remuneration to Mr. Burritt. At the 
same time it decided to keep the head- 
quarters of the Society in Boston, and Mr. 
Beckwith was to devote his whole time to 
the administration of its business. 

Beginning January, 1846, therefore, the 
magazine, in better type, with "an orna- 
mental cover" and double its former size, 
was issued regularly from Worcester, Mas- 
sachusetts, the city in which Mr. Burritt 
then had his home. Its full title now 
became "The Advocate of Peace and Uni- 
versal Brotherhood." The "Learned 
Blacksmith" had for some time been in- 
terested in the League for Universal 
Brotherhood and conceived the two move- 
ments as one. 

The new series contained much less 
news about the American Peace Society 
than before; but it was filled with many 
short articles, essays and poems on peace, 
with two or three pages usually devoted 
to the progress of peace principles in the 
world. Mrs. Sigourney, the poet, con- 
tributed frequently; Longfellow and W. 
W. Story were among the several other 
poets appearing in the issues of this year. 
It is recorded that the number of sub- 
scribers increased under the new manage- 

In October, 1846, Mr. Burritt published 
in the Advocate a pledge put out by the 
League of Universal Brotherhood in Wor- 
cester, Massachusetts, and in Binning- 




ham, England, and urged its general adop- 
tion by persons in this country. The 
pledge added to the anti-war-system idea 
the abolition of all customs and institu- 
tions tending to make or keep men un- 
equal. It contained, explicitly, the re- 
fusal to serve in any war, and was con- 
sidered by many to be implicitly anti- 
capital punishment, anti-slavery, and, even 
in its final interpretation, anti-govern- 

Meanwhile the Executive Committee of 
the American Peace Society had restated 
its policy in May, 1846. It resolved 
"That the Society, in accordance with its 
constitution, as it has ever done, will con- 
fine itself definitely to the single object of 
abolishing international war." It reit- 
erated its intention to keep entirely clear 
of anti-government propaganda, or anti- 
capital punishment, or any issue other 
than that of international war as a custom 
of settling disputes between nations. 

Such drastic difference of opinion as 
to the province of the Society and its 
organ was bound to precipitate a crisis. 
Therefore, in December 1846, Mr. Burritt 
and others of the more radical members of 
the board of directors and the executive 
committee resigned from office. This al- 
lowed those who believed, for instance, in 
capital punishment or who believed that 
occasions might arise when defensive war 
would be righteous, to work in the Society 
against the occasions for war. 

The magazine, therefore, reverted to 
the central office for publication, and Mr. 
Burritt, though friendly to the Society, de- 
voted the most of his time for some years 
to more radical reform movements. He 
and all the group, however, retained mem- 
bership in the Society and became later 
active again in its work, though on the 
conservative program. 

In January, 1847, the title became once 
more the "Advocate of Peace." It was 
issued again under Mr. Beckwith's editor- 
ship, on alternate months, two years to 
the volume. It again sought subscribers 
among all, "without regard to sect or 
party," who wished to labor for the abol- 
ishing of international war. The con- 
tents included an increasing number of 
articles on concrete situations in this 

country and abroad. Foreign wars were 
often used as illustrative material for 
peace principles. 

The Mexican War, never popular in the 
^N'orthern States, was opposed without 
taint of treason, in the Advocate of 
Peace. In the belief that a review of 
that war would point the moral of peace, 
a prize was offered through the Advocate 
for the best book on the subject. The 
prize was awarded April, 1849, to Eev. 
Mr. Livermore, of Keene, New Hamp- 
shire; but, since he had to be abroad for 
some months just at that time, the first to 
be published was the second choice, the 
manuscript written by Judge William Jay, 
then President of the Society. This re- 
view of the Mexican War remains today a 
little classic on the subject. It was adver- 
tised extensively in the magazine, and 
\videly circulated. 

In the year 1849, nearly the whole of 
the issue covering July, August, and Sep- 
tember was filled with the annual address 
delivered before the Society by Charles 
Sumner, then one of the executive com- 
mittee. This, too, remains one of tlie 
classics of peace literature. 

The international peace congresses in 
Europe, coming on the scene from 1843 
to 1853, were fully reported in the maga- 
zine. Meanwhile the editions increased, 
both because of an additional number of 
subscribers and because many gratuitous 
copies were circulated where they might 
be supposed to do good. 

Mr. Beckwith's health failed in 1856, 
and J. P. Blanchard volunteered as tem- 
porary editor. The brevity and popular 
form of articles in the magazine mark the 
transition. Considerable fiction with a 
j)eace moral, including some stories by 
T. S. Arthur, appeared at this time. Mr. 
Beckwith, however, returned to his edi- 
torial duties a few months later, and the 
character of the articles became again 
more solid in nature. 

In the number for December, 1856, the 
slavery question forced its way into the 
Advocate. An article on "Peace and 
Slavery" was reluctantly admitted to its 
columns, with the following note by the 
editor: "This article, though somewhat 
aside from our usual course of discus- 




sion, deserves very serious consideration. 
. . . We should be glad to regard its 
leading topic a aide issue, but we fear it 
will too soon be found to lie directly 
across the path of our cause." 

As in every other war which the Society 
has weathered, it had tried desperately 
through its organ to advise other means of 
settlement of this crisis. Many possible 
solutions of the conflict of ideas between 
the North and the South were admitted to 
the magazine's pages, but in the end its 
only path lay in the abandonment of all 
search for the course proper for individ- 
uals to pursue in the war which broke out. 
Each individual must use his own judg- 
ment,, and the Society published the fact 
that as a Society it was not concerned with 
the methods of governments in dealing 
with insurrection ; but that it was still, as 
always, unalterably opposed to the system 
of international war. 

The dilemma of subscribers to the 
Advocate of Peace, many of whom were 
abolitionists as well, was also serious. The 
war was on. The government called for 
soldiers. The Society and its maga- 
zine had to content itself with marking 
time. Succeeding numbers of the Advo- 
cate continued to clarify its support of 
the government, but rigidly adhered to 
its opposition to the war method between 
nations. It declared its great work to be 
"to educate the entire community in the 
principles of peace — ... a hercu- 
lean task, but it can be done." 

Organization activities of the Society 
ceased, perforce, during the war. It main- 
tained its office, however, and tlie maga- 
zine, appearing regularly and unfalter- 
ingly, was, through the labors and gener- 
osity of a few men, sent gratis to thou- 
sands of religious groups and to about a 
thousand periodicals. An edition of 
about 40,000 copies was at times dis- 
tributed in this way. 

By the year 1866, however, it was 
deemed that the time had come to return 
to a policy of paid subscriptions. This 
materially reduced the size of the editions 

The necessity of clarifying its views, 
precipitated by the Civil War, was no new 
thing for the Society. It had before and 
has since faced specific situations blocking 

the path of preconceived, absolute doc- 
trines. Fortunately, Ladd and his cowork- 
ers had sanely laid firm foundations. It 
was only necessary to dig away the irrele- 
vant to come to tenets which could well be 
accepted and emphasized. The magazine 
\\as found, at the close of the war, to have 
settled upon its two main points, which it 
stressed : 1. The formation of a code of in- 
ternational law; 2. The establishment of 
means for arbitration and the judicial set- 
tlement of disputes between nations. 
While arguments on the desirability of 
peace still appeared, the emphasis was now 
upon these points dealing with the rela- 
tions between nations. The thought was 
to open the way for nations to achieve 
their interests by means other than war. 

In January, 1869, the magazine was 
given a larger page and better type. 
Brief articles and poems broke up the 
solid columns. Oliver Wendell Holmes, 
John Gr. Whittier, Julia Ward Howe, and 
William C. Bryant frequently appeared 
among the contributors. 

This era was marked by the organiza- 
tion of a Western Department, reports of 
which were frequently printed in the 
magazine. Then, too, short notes of the 
doings of foreign governments which 
might be of general interest appeared 
quite regularly. 

During 1870, notes on the editorial 
page refer to the illness of Mr. Beckwith, 
and in March, Rev. Amasa Lord was an- 
nounced to have come East from the 
Western Department to take charge of the 
office and publications. In May, Mr. 
Beckwith died, after thirty years of ardu- 
ous labor in behalf of the Society and its 
magazine. Thanks to his work, the small 
circulation of the Advocate was reported 
doubled in 1870, though large numbers of 
copies were still sent gratis to organiza- 
tions and to some persons. 

Indeed, all lines of work were enlarged 
that year, and the fact that many other 
papers gave space to peace articles was 
hailed by Mr. Lord as the "end of the 
stage of martyrdom and the beginning of 
the stage of statesmanship." 

In August, 1870, the last leaf of the 
Advocate was called "The Child's Advo- 
cate of Peace." It carried illustrations 
and matter intended to interest children. 
In 1872 it was issued separately for chil- 




dren and called "The Angel of Peace." 
This continued as a separate paper, 
though under the same editorship as the 
Advocate of Peace, until 1905, when it 
was discontinued "from lack of support." 

In 1871, Mr. Lord, because of ill health, 
relinquished much of his work, and the 
new secretary, Eev, James B. Miles, be- 
came editor of the Advocate. 

In the Boston fire, the latter part of 
that year, the Society lost many of its 
plates and much of its other material 
which was at the publishing house, though 
its offices in the Wesleyan Building were 
untouched. These losses, combined with 
the financial depression of the seventies, 
caused the magazine to suffer heavily, as 
is evident from its appearance. The elec- 
tion of Charles H. Malcolm as secretary 
in 1876 gave the Advocate a new editor, 
but the periodical changed its aspect very 
little. When Mr. Howard C. Dunham 
became its tenth editor, October, 1879, it 
was a paper of only eight quarto pages 
and there were only four or less issues to 
the volume. New volumes began any- 
where from July to January. 

A decided change, however, can be no- 
ticed with the arrival, in 1884, of Rev. 
Rowland B. Howard as editor. The last 
volume of the preceding series had been 
numbered XV. The new volume, how- 
ever, was given the number 47, perhaps 
because the magazine under the general 
title. Advocate of Peace, which it now 
carried, had been running for forty-seven 
years, though, as a matter of fact, many 
volumes had covered more than one year. 
From now on it was the policy to make 
the beginning of each volume coincide 
with the year. The entire appearance was 
now changed and the title read the "Amer- 
ican Advocate of Peace and Arbitration." 
Each number contained sixteen pages, in- 
cluding the cover, which was white like 
the pages. The price was announced at 
fifty cents a year ; but this was raised two 
years thereafter to one dollar — a price 
which was maintained until after thfl 
World War. 

Mr. Howard died in Rome, January, 
1892, and his place was filled by Benja- 
min F. Trueblood, LL. D., who served as 
secretary and editor for the next twenty- 
three years. The changes which Dr. 
Trueblood made in the magazine were not 

drastic at first, but gradual improvement 
kept pace with general magazine develop- 
ment for those years. The title was 
changed again to "American Advocate of 
Peace," and later, in June, 1894, to Ad- 
vocate of Peace. Editorials were in- 
creasingly able. The short paragraph 
news dealt with political and economic 
affairs where they obviously toviched 
upon peace matters. The new series of 
world peace congresses, which had already 
begun in 1889, in Paris, were attended 
usually by the editor and carefully re- 
ported in the magazine. 

Among the fundamental improvements 
in the Advocate was the appearance of 
an annual index, at first a very simple 
one. Less poetry appeared now and no 
fiction. The themes of arbitration and a 
world court were continually kept to the 

The crisis of the Spanish-American 
War was met and survived without seri- 
ous breakdown of the policy of the maga- 
zine. By 1900 the editor called attention 
to the century's growth in the public atti- 
tude toward peace. The secular press and 
general literature then took often the 
peace point of view for granted, and at- 
tention was already concentrated upon 
methods of securing it. 

In February, 1904, three auxiliary so- 
cieties were reported in the Advocate. 
By 1908 there were ten. This made 
greater demand for the periodical, so that 
in that year an edition of 5,500 was dis- 
tributed. Two years later, 7,000. 

In May, 1911, the Advocate of Pea^e 
announced another removal of its head- 
quarters, this time to Washington, D. C. 
With the rapid growth of branch socie- 
ties, it was felt by the directors that a 
truly national center could better extend 
its work. The June number for that 
year, therefore, was published in Wash- 

The following year there was a general 
reorganization of the Society on a feder- 
ative basis, the Advocate reporting twenty- 
five branch societies. 

The present editor of the Advocate of 
Peace was called to the central office as 
executive director in 1912. He had al- 
ready helped, in 1906, to organize the new 
Connecticut Peace Society, of which he 
became president, and since 1910 he had 




been a member of the board of directors 
of the American Peace Society. 

Dr. Trueblood was taken ill the fol- 
lowing year, 1913, and, although he re- 
covered sufficiently to resume his editorial 
duties for a time, his reduced health com- 
pelled him to lay down his responsibilities 
finally in June, 1915. A member of the 
Society of Friends, Dr. Trueblood had 
always taken so broad a position on peace 
questions that men of many minds in 
other matters could co-operate in the work 
of the American Peace Society. Shortly 
after the resignation of Dr. Trueblood, 
Mr. Call was elected secretary and editor. 

This was in the midst of the World 
War. Like all other wars, but in a 
greater degree, the World War worked 
havoc with the membership of the Amer- 
ican Peace Society and also with the sup- 
port of its magazine. Mr. Call carried 
the work on, however, in the same general 
lines as those laid down by his prede- 

When the United States recognized the 
state of war with Germany, a war situ- 
ation again confronted the magazine. 
Once more it was decided that a specific 
condition arising from the maladjustment 
of the world must be met and that with- 
out violence to the purposes of the Society. 
So the Advocate, in this crisis, supported 
squarely the government, recognizing that 
the only way out of the war was through. 
Meanwhile the war itself was pointing the 
moral so long preached in the Advocate 
of Peace. 

However, the Society suffered heavy 
losses. Its branches largely melted away 
because of the strenuous efforts to win the 
war, and support of the Advocate natu- 
rally lessened. It was published regularly, 
nevertheless, and some improvements 
were inaugurated in type and general 
make-up during the war. 

When the war closed, the whole peace 
movement was found to be split up into 
countless fragments and factions. Voices 
were raised to preach doctrines ranging 
all the way from anti-government to the 
enforcement of peace and support of the 
new League of Nations. 

A reorganization, this time away from 
the federative principle, took place in the 
Society in 1921, and in 1924 the format 
of the magazine underwent a complete 
change. It took the shape of most of the 
best monthlies of the day, with a smaller 
page than before, two columns to the 
page, sixty-four pages to the number, a 
blue cover, and the title amended to read, 
"Advocate of Peace Through Justice," 
with the words "For International Under- 
standing" at the top of the front cover. 
Gratuitous distribution largely stopped 
with the rising costs of production, and 
the magazine, on a sounder basis of sup- 
port, took its place among the better mag- 
azines dealing with international affairs. 

The policy is still to emphasize inter- 
national justice, with special stress, at the 
moment, upon the codification of interna- 
tional law. To this it has added the pre- 
sentation, by unbiased contributors, of po- 
litical, economic, and social trends 

It is hoped that by its present policy 
the magazine may advance better under- 
standing between nations. It gives space 
to news of any kind pertinent to the 
growth of a rational peace between peo- 
ples. The methods of working for peace 
are now so varied, carried on by so many 
men and women of differing ideas, that 
the magazine finds a widening field upon 
which it can draw. As an aid for all those 
seriously interested to advance the cause 
of the friendly settlement of international 
disputes, it apparently meets a demand. 

As one views the varied peace currents 
of today, especially the longing for a 
closer community of effort, it looks as if 
this magazine, the oldest of its kind in the 
world, together with its reprints, scat- 
tered far and wide for a century, has not 
been without effect. There is still need 
for further development of the periodical. 
Only lack of funds stands in the way. It 
may be expected, in any case, however, to 
go on with its insistence upon the sure, 
if unspectacular, methods of reason and 

So there the Advocate of Peace stands 
at the end of its first hundred years of 







(Mr. Ralston, author of "Interaatioiial Arbitral Law and Procedure," has repre- 
sented the United States in a number of international cases.) 

A MAN presents himself at the portals 
of Ellis Island. Our laws, the jus- 
tice or efficacy of which we do not discuss, 
require us to question him. "Do you be- 
lieve in organized government?" He an- 
swers, "I believe in government, of course, 
but let it not interfere with me. I ac- 
cept it so long as it does not affect my 
personal independence, so long as it leaves 
me master of whatever concerns mine 
honor and permits me to avenge myself 
upon all who infringe upon that honor. 
I believe in government so long as it al- 
lows me, as sovereign over my own destiny, 
to determine for myself what interests 
are vital to me and to slay those who, in 
my opinion, trench upon them." To the 
man who so replies we say: "Your recog- 
nition of government is formal; your ap- 
preciation of right as between man and 
man is undeveloped. If admitted to our 
country, you would be a danger to our 
well-being. In very essence you are an 
anarchist and as such may not enter." 

Let us suppose a new state has arisen 
demanding recognition and admission to 
the family of nations. Its representatives, 
when entering into treaty obligations 
with other nations, are permitted to with- 
draw from submission to the judgment 
of any tribunal formed to adjudicate in- 
ternational difficulties all questions which 
affect its independence, its honor, or its 
vital interests. Whether in fact a dispute 
involves any of these elements, the State 
retains, and is recognized as having a right 
to retain, the privilege of determining 
for itself. At most today we ask, not in- 
sist, that it shall arbitrate pecuniary 

*The demand for this statement, first made 
in address by Mr. Ralston before the Penn- 
sylvania Peace Congress, May 18, 1908, has 
exhausted our supply. For that reason it is 
here rei)roduced. — Editor. 

When such a position is taken in in- 
ternational law, is not the wildest anarchy 
legitimatized? Little harm can the senti- 
ments of one man do. His opinions 
and interests will be corrected and con- 
trolled by the opinions and interests of 
his neighbors. Perforce he must submit to 
the judgment of his fellows all the ques- 
tions as to which the man at Ellis Is- 
land claimed the right of self-determina- 
tion. But when a State — which, after all, 
is but a collection of human units — de- 
termines, without restraint, its justifica- 
tion for war over such questions and even 
settles for itself their very existence, thus 
claiming the right, governed only by its 
own sense of justice, to steal from and to 
murder another million of human units 
who exercise a similar power, we have 
chaos unspeakable — chaos sanctified. By 
international law, paradoxically speaking, 
thus we have regulated chaos. And yet 
analysis shows that after all there is pre- 
sented to us but the simple problem with 
which we opened — the right of anarchy 
— a problem confused only by the indefi- 
nite multiplication of the participants. 

We will not lose sight of the fact that, 
even as to pecuniary claims, in almost 
every case a nation may refuse arbitra- 
tion, upon the pretense that the very ad- 
vancement of such claims is a reflection 
upon its honor, perhaps because there is 
offered a suggestion deemed disgraceful 
to its administrative or judicial officers, 
to which suggestion it refuses to submit. 
Must we not, then, conclude that our in- 
ternational law is but taking its first few 
feeble steps; that we are just entering 
upon a long and painful period of edu- 
cation, the end of which will be to assim- 
ilate international justice to national jus- 

Taking a look into the future, we may 
recognize that the time must come when 




such a thing as international law relating 
to warfare will be as obsolete as is to- 
day common and statute law relating to 
the status of slaves. I remember as a boy 
reading a book^, then old, laying down 
the rules of the Code Duello. Today such 
a work prescribing the amenities of pri- 
vate murder would seem as out of place 
in our civilization as, let us hope, in the 
future will seem the half of the volumes 
of international law which are now given 
over to the examination of the courtesies 
of public slaughter. 

But our course seems clear. We must 
develop the idea of arbitration, insist that 
no question is too small, no interest too 
great, to be subjected to the judgment of 
disinterested and competent men; for, in- 
ternationally as well as in our private 
lives, something on its face immaterial 
may lead to consequences coloring history. 
Tracing the causes of wars to their ob- 
scure beginnings, how often we find that 
foolish jealousies, accidental or intentional 
lack of observance of the smaller courtesies 
of life, have led on and on to the slaugh- 
ter of thousands. But if apparently small 
things can with justice and advantage be 
settled between man and man and nation 
and nation by submission to impartial 
men, with how much more obvious reason 
should the larger and more dangerous 
matters take the same course ! And, after 
all, can those who take part in them best 
determine whether the matters in dispute 
be large or small, great enough to justify 
the killing of thousands or insignificant 
enough to be atoned for by the payment 
of a few dollars? 

How needless does calm investigation 
show to have been even modern wars con- 
ducted by men priding themselves upon 
their civilization? Can any one living 
tell beyond a peradventure what was the 
Schleswig-Holstein question, which in- 
volved a bloody conflict? Was there just 
and sufficient cause for the Franco-Prus- 
sian struggle? Does any one attach large 
importance to the supposed questions lead- 
ing to the Crimean War, and was the 
charge of the Light Brigade, immortalized 
in poetry, sufficient return to the world 
for thousands of deaths among the sub- 
jects of four nations ? 

When we look back upon all these strug- 
gles, standing in the disinterested attitude 
of strangers to them, living as short a 
time as from forty to sixty years after, 
and consider their doubtful or inadequate 
causes, can we not agree that the arbitra- 
ment of a group of cool and disinterested 
men living contemporaneously could, if 
asked, have afforded a peaceful and honor- 
able solution? And if in any of these 
cases the causes were so slight or so in- 
volved and so difficult of reasonable state- 
ment as to preclude reference to arbitra- 
tion, may we not think such fact to be 
sufficient to condemn States engaging in 
such wars as mere brawlers in the family 
of nations? 

Visible advances toward the goal I have 
indicated have been made, and in the 
making America has taken an honorable 
and leading part. Repeatedly have we ar- 
bitrated boundary questions, questions of 
a nature which, in a less civilized age or 
with less cultivated participants, would 
have led to frightful wars and have been 
regarded by the countries in dispute as 
affecting their honor and vital interests. 
Very many commissions to which we have 
been parties have settled claims disputes 
touching wrongs to individual citizens of 
a character which, under less happy cir- 
cumstances, would have spelt war, and for 
even smaller aggravation than has been 
involved in them less favored nations have 
with heartiness entered upon throat-cut- 
ting and destruction. Can we not even to- 
day take pride in the Alabama Claims 
Commission, which satisfactorily solved 
questions which might be classified as of 
honor and vital interests, although osten- 
sibly determining only pecuniary liability, 
and which made this settlement at a cost 
which, compared with that of a few weeks 
of war, was infinitesimal ? 

Even in the small matter of claims of 
individual citizens, no nation can properly 
be a judge in its own cause. Many a 
time has this been illustrated, and I will 
refer but briefly to a recent demonstra- 
tion with regard to Venezuela. When the 
ten commissions sat in Caracas, in 1903, 
to determine the claims of as many na- 
tions against Venezuela, there were pre- 
sented before them demands aggregating 




in round numbers $36,000,000. The com- 
missions and umpires determined that but 
$6,500,000 should be paid, or, roughly, 18 
per cent of the original amount of the de- 
mands. One nation, as a condition preced- 
ent to the execution of the protocol of ar- 
bitration of her remaining claims, de- 
manded payment in full in advance of cer- 
tain claims aggregating nearly $350,000. 
For precisely similar claims submitted to 
arbitration she received 28 per cent of her 
demands, indicating fallibility, as I be- 
lieve, when she acted as her own judge 
and demonstrating that the advance pay- 
ment was largely unjustifiable. The ex- 
perience of other nations before like tri- 
bunals was of the same general nature. 
And the history of claims arbitrations fur- 
nishes many similar instances. 

But what is honor, about which na- 
tions hesitate to arbitrate ? For theft, for 
murder, we have a definite measure, born 
of the universal conscience, the same yes- 
terday, today, and forever; but honor, as 
the term is applied, is a mental concept 
varying with the mood of the times. He 
who accuses my honor does not rob me. 
Honor is only to be lost by my personal 
act. The impeachment of my honor may 
call for self-examination to determine 
whether the accusation be well founded. 
The death of the offender does not adju- 
dicate the falsehood of the accusation. 

If the delivery of an insult be consid- 
ered to be an impeachment of honor, 
should the reply come in the shape of 
war? If a man or a nation is insulted, 
as we term it, is the insult extinguished 
by the death of the insulter? Does not 
the killing convict the slayer of want of 
discretion and temper? Is not the best 
answer a well-ordered life and established 
good reputation? Should not other re- 
sort be forbidden than declination of fur- 
ther relations with the offender, who, in- 
dividual or nation, has merely sinned 
against good manners? 

A reservation of independence as not 
the subject of arbitration seems, on anal- 
ysis, meaningless though harmless. Arbi- 
tration postulates an agreement between 
equals. Questioning the independence of 
one party or the other involves a doubt 
as to their equality and is foreign to the 
idea of arbitration. 

When we treat of vital interests we 
touch a subject never properly to be 
withdrawn from arbitration. What are vi- 
tal interests? They are today whatever 
the nation declares to be such and with- 
draws from arbitration. The so-called 
vital interests are matters of commerce, 
trade and politics. As to matters of trade 
and commerce, we shall submit that their 
advancement as a basis for vital interests 
is founded upon a misconception of the 
purposes of government. As I take it, 
governments are formed to preserve the 
true liberty of the individual, to protect 
him in his rights of person and, as sub- 
ordinate to his rights of person, his rights 
of property. They are not formed to ex- 
tend and develop commerce and trade as 
such. Properly speaking, no nation has 
political interests beyond its own borders, 
and were we to enter upon the reign of 
arbitration no question of political inter- 
est, as we shall attempt to demonstrate, 
could properly arise. 

Politically speaking, vital interests are, 
when analyzed, found to be based upon 
either a desire to ultimately possess some- 
thing now belonging to another or a fear 
that a strong nation may violently so en- 
large itself as to endanger us. With the 
thorough establishment of unrestricted ar- 
bitration we will not be able to indulge 
our predatory instincts at the expense of 
our neighbors. With such condition, we 
will not fear lest another nation so ag- 
grandize itself by violence as to be a 
source of danger to us. At one and the 
same time we would restrain our own un- 
just acquisitiveness and we would lose 
our fear. The thorough establishment, 
therefore, of arbitration means the can- 
cellation of the term "vital interests" as 
applied to politics. 

Can we hope for justice from arbitra- 
tion? We might, in view of the course 
of our discussion, respond by asking. Has 
justice been obtained from war? Long 
ago legislators found that the wager of 
battle failed to secure justice hetween 
man and man. Without lengthening the 
discussion, we may believe that armed 
conflict has not on the whole advanced 
the rule of right. When at one time war 
has served to check inordinate ambition, 
at as many others it has furthered its 




purposes. We may concede that in private 
matters justice has often gone forward 
with halting steps, has even at times 
seemed to go backward ; yet who among us 
would dispense with the conclusions of 
judge and jury and revive the wager of 

From the beginning, with the advan- 
tage of national precedents and experi- 
ences, we may expect arbitration to bring 
us approximate justice. That always exact 
justice should be rendered may not be ex- 
pected. The members of our Supreme 
Court, differing as they frequently do 
most vitally, will not say that this tri- 
bunal has never erred. But, despite the 
possibility of error, we find that order and 
the well-being of the community must be 
maintained even at the chance of indi- 
vidual injustice, a chance which no human 
skill can eliminate. 

Arbitral history leads us to the con- 
clusion that more than an approximation 
of right may be expected, that a tribunal 
which is the center of observation by the 
whole world will seek to give, and will 
give, a judgment as nearly righteous as 
may be. In the whole history of arbitra- 

tions, but one tribunal has ever been sus- 
pected of corruption, and, by joint agree- 
ment, its findings were reviewed. Slight 
criticism may be made of the generality 
of other like tribunals. Today, doubtless, 
even the English will agree that the find- 
ings of the Alabama Joint High Commis- 
sion were just. 

Of the arbitral sentences given by the 
Permanent Court of Arbitration at The 
Hague, one alone — that in the Venezuelan 
Preferential Case — has received serious 
criticism. Even in this case judicial set- 
tlement, though perhaps erroneous, was 
immensely valuable. 

Let it not be said that the ideas to 
which I have sought to give expressions 
are too advanced, are impractical. It is 
only by "hitching our wagon to a star" 
that we may progress. Let us not for- 
get that there is nothing blinder and stu- 
pider, nothing less practical, than the so- 
called practical man ; that only among the 
dreamers of dreams of human advance- 
ment are to be found those whom the 
flow of events demonstrates to have had 
the clearness of vision of the truly practi- 
cal man. 



Retiring Chairman of the Department of International Relations of the General Federa- 
tion of Women's Clubs 

IN CONNECTION with the work of 
this department for international re- 
lations, many interesting letters have come 
from peace societies on the one hand and 
defense societies on the other. The time 
is coming when representatives of these 
two schools of thought will either have to 
work together for a common end or cease 
trying to be the moulders of American 
opinion. At present they are occupying 
opposite and increasingly hostile camips. 
They are using a great deal of time and 
energy in fighting each other that ought 
to be used in the service of humanity. 
Each side declares that its objective is 
peace, but the activities of both sides are 
not suggestive of peace so much as of the 
age-old urge to war. 

♦Reprinted from Oeneral Federation News, 
Vol 8, No. 7, January, 1928. 

"The peace societies quote President 
Washington's sentiments in favor of world 
peace when he said, 'My first wish is to 
see this plague of mankind banished from 
the earth and the sons and daughters of 
the world employed in more pleasing and 
innocent pursuits than in preparing im- 
plements and exercising them for the de- 
struction of mankind.' The defense so- 
cieties quote General Washington in favor 
of defense: *To be prepared for war is 
one of the most effectual ways of preserv- 
ing peace. A free people ought not only 
to be armed but to be disciplined.' 

Urges Study of Washington 

"It would pay us all to study how 
Washington was able to combine these 
two ideas. He was neither an isolation- 
ist, advocating a great standing army. 




nor a preacher of passive resistance. The 
only alliances he warned against was the 
entangling kind. He did not at any time 
express the fear that future Americans 
would be unable to cultivate friendly re- 
lations with the rest of the world. He 
was too good a business man to believe 
that America could retain trade relations 
with the other nations and at the same 
time avoid political contacts. Washing- 
ton had plans for a great citizen army, 
as effective for peace as the citizen army 
of Switzerland, but free from its com- 
pulsory features. If it had not been that 
the jealousy of the various States pre- 
vented the carrying out of his plan as 
originally intended, America might have 
proved as effectively as Switzerland has 
done that a citizen army is really a great 
power for peace. 

"We have in America 82 peace societies, 
many of native origin, and some which 
are branchces of foreign organizations. 
Some of these societies are doing effective 
work for peace. Too many, however, are 
trying to run the government by driving 
from the back seat. Patriotic Americans 
should not use their ballots to send their 
representatives to Washington and then 
encourage another group, who have elected 
themselves, to tell those representatives 
what to do. It is the right of American 
citizens to criticize their government, but 
those critics who have had no experience 
in politics and who find fault with the 
government, no matter what it does, are 
not the people to be trusted with leader- 
ship. They are the same type that in 
private life attribute mean motives to 
everybody except themselves. 

"Peace societies lay themselves open 
to charges of being unpatriotic when they 
ask the colleges to urge young men to 
decide for themselves whether or not they 
will defend their country in case of war. 
"These societies would do better to 
suggest that young men use their minds 
to study the causes of war and to help 
to discover how peaceful settlements of 
international disputes may be worked out. 
Patriotism is not a matter of choice, but 
of duty, and deciding to shirk in time 
of war is not offering a lasting contribu- 
tion to the cause of peace. 

"On the other hand, what can be said 
for those near-sighted patriots who quote 

W^ashington as in favor of national de- 
fense, but ti-y to brand as enemies of the 
Eepublic everybody who quotes him in 
favor of doing away with war? Such 
people set themselves up as the sole 
judges of patriotism and indiscriminately 
charge those who are laboring for peace 
with being in league with communists. 
National defense alone might mean peace 
if we were an isolated country, but so 
long as the great prosperity, of which we 
are so proud, is linked up with our for- 
eign trade, we must have international 

Illogical So-called Patriot 

"There is another type of so-called 
patriot who is not worthy of the title. 
It is represented by the man who refuses 
to consider any plans for the doing away 
with war because he maintains that human 
nature and common sense are opposed to 
any such plan. Because men have al- 
ways fought and always will, he argues 
that nations will always go to war. He 
refuses to examine the arguments of the 
greatest statesmen of the world and he 
overlooks one of the greatest factors in 
history in connection with the making of 
war. I refer to the fact that the modern 
type of war, carried on by means of high 
explosives, is less than 500 years old. It 
had its first try-out in 1453, at the seige 
of Constantinople, and we are told that 
in its last try-out it will not only destroy 
civilization, but may wipe out the whole 
human race. This is not human; it is 
diabolical. It is not common sense, but 
arrant nonsense, to argue that men, having 
brought civilization to a high level by 
means of ingenious inventions, should 
proceed on the theory that the logical out- 
come of such civilization is suicide. 

"People who preach national isolation 
in the name of patriotism are about as 
wise and far-seeing as that famous bird 
with long legs and a small brain that 
feels safe and satisfied only when its head 
is buried in the sand. 

"Our ignorance is often betrayed by 
the things we laugh at. In letters and 
in marked editorials I have noticed the 
ridicule heaped on those who speak about 
outlawing war, 'as if,' says one con- 
temptuous critic, 'war could be stopped 
by the simple process of saying it is out- 
lawed!' If anybody has ever suggested 




such a meaning for the term it has been 
these critics themselves, and the only ex- 
planation of their mental attitude is that 
it is easier to be ignorant than to be in- 
formed. To outlaw murder does not do 
away with murder, but it defines murder 
as a crime against society and makeis 
legal prosecution of the murderer pos- 
sible. If a statute were embodied in in- 
ternational law making aggressive war a 
crime, the nation waging aggressive war- 
fare would be an outlaw among the nations 
of the world and should be brouglit to tlie 
bar of international justice. 

"Contempt for tlie imagined opinions 
of the opposing party is characteristic of 
much of the argument that is obscuring 
the whole questions of national security 
and international friendship. The 'See 
Eeds' in one group and the color-blind 
sentimentalists in the other are not the 
stuff from which true leaders are made. 
The great mass of intelligent, patriotic 
citizens of this country should clear their 
ranks of fanatics of both extremes and 
should work together in one united com- 
pany for patriotism and peace." 



Member of Congress from Mississippi 

OUR army is generally spoken of as 
a small affair — a skeleton organiza- 
tion, if you please — one that could easily 
be built to in the time of national stress. 
This may have been true at one time, but 
it is not true now. The skeleton has lots 
of meat on its bones. In fact, it has be- 
come rather corpulent. 

The army can be well divided into six 
])arts — the Regular Army, the federalized 
National Guard, the Organized Reserves, 
the reserve Officers' Training Corps, the 
citizens' military training corps, and na- 
tional rifles matches. The last five named 
of these are spoken of as civilian organi- 
zations. They are, however, promoted, 
controlled, and instructed by Regular 
Army officers and enlisted men — about 
2,000 officers and about 25,000 enlisted 
men being directly or indirectly in charge 
of their military training and instruction. 
In the main, these so-called civilian or- 
ganizations are well versed in the art of 
warfare. They constitute a fine lot of 
men. The Regular Army officers largely 
in charge of them know what they are 
after. They have worked up programs of 
enlargement ranging from five to fifteen 
years, and all of these organizations are 
growing in size, power, and strength like 
weeds in a farmer's field. Their influ- 
ence is extensive and their wishes are 
highly respected by public officials, and 
with continued growth and enlargement 
their influence will grow with their in- 
creased size. 

The beginning of another unit has now 
the sanction of the law. It is called the 
munitions unit. Congress authorized it 
by an amendment to the national defense 
act, which was approved June 8, 1926. 
This subcommittee, however, saw fit to 
prevent its beginning. The purpose of this 
unit was to take young men after gradu- 
ation from college and give them three 
moutlis' training in the Regular Army, 
then send them to college for nine months 
and after this to put them in the factories 
of the country for six months, giving in 
all eighteen months' specialized training 
in factory work and management, and in 
the event of hostilities these men would 
become officers and would take charge of 
the factories of our country and operate 
them under the supervision of the Regu- 
lar Army. It was proposed to begin with 
250 such students and later to bring it 
up to 400, and thence to a larger figure. 
The law says that one-half of 1 per cent 
of the enlisted strength of the Army and 
2 per cent of officers can be trained an- 
nually, and with our Regular Army es- 
tablishment at its present size, this would 
provide approximately 840 students to be 
trained annually, and with the retirement 
figure at sixty-four years it would be pos- 
sible to have about 34,500 such officers. 
Of course, this figure is the outstanding 
one and should be reduced by one-half on 
account of deaths, resignations, and other 
causes; but even with 17,250 such officers 
its size and expense would be enormous. 




This scheme has never been tried out. No 
country has it now or has undertaken it. 
The student trained may or may not fol- 
low the work for which he was specially 
trained. If he did not, his training was 
wasted. If he did pursue the work for 
which he was trained, it would be foolish 
to let him contract with himself in the 
purchase of supplies for the government or 
to permit him to adopt work standards, 
with the War Department backing him 
in his every whim. Aside from this, it is 
a dangerous undertaking in a republic to 
put its factories, including management 
and men, under the control of the military 

The Eegular Army has an enlisted 
strength of 118,750 men, with 13,000 
officers, and to the enlisted strength should 
be added the Philippine scouts with 6,060 
men. There are 1,215 warrant officers. 
There are also 165 retired officers on ac- 
tive duty. There are also thousands of 
civilians working for the Eegular Army. 
Their number is becoming legion. Count- 
ing all officers, their number is 13,380, 
and the enlisted strength, including the 
Philippine scouts, is 124,810. Of course, 
to the Regular Army goes the lion's share 
of the appropriation carried in this bill. 

The actual enlisted strength of the 
army is about 5,000 more than it was in 
1926 and 1927. The officers are about the 
same. The actual increased size of the 
army can easily absorb the 1,248 enlisted 
men that were added to the Air Corps in 
1928 and the 1,248 added to the Air 
Corps in the bill now before Congress. 
Personally I take it that the Air Corps 
increases the efficiency and effectiveness 
of the army, and enlisted men who have 
been used in other ways have an increased 
value when they are transferred from a 
less effective service to one more modern 
and more serviceable in a military way. 
There is no loss, therefore, by the trans- 
fer, but a gain. 

The federalized National Guard has 
grown by leaps and bounds since the war. 
In 1920 it had 1,939 officers and 47,019 
enlisted men. On June 30, 1927, there 
were 12,010 officers and 182 warrant offi- 
cers and 168,750 enlisted men, a total of 
180,920 men. This bill carries an appro- 
priation sufficient to increase this number 

to 188,000, of whom 13,630 are officers. 
Next year, according to General Summer- 
all, 190,000 is the program. Gen. C. C. 
Hammond, Chief of the Militia Bureau, 
says that after that their immediate pro- 
gram will seek a total aggregate strength 
of 210,521 National Guard troops. The 
national defense act authorized a federal- 
ized National Guard strength of 435,000. 
I dare say that it will not be very long 
before this will be their goal. 

The federalized guard is no small affair. 
It is a highly efficient organization. This 
bill now before Congress provides for 
forty-eight drills a year and fifteen days' 
intensive trianing at camps. Officers and 
men participating in these drills and tak- 
ing this intensive training are paid for 
doing it. Quite a number of the members 
of the guard have yearly status and are 
paid accordingly. The guard is trained 
just the same as the Regular Army. It is 
organized along the same lines. It has an 
Air Corps, Tank Corps, engineers, field 
artillery, chemical warfare sections, ob- 
servation sections, and so forth. Three 
hundred and ten of its officers and 125 
enlisted men go to service schools and are 
there given special training. Three hun- 
dred and seventy-five thousand dollars is 
provided for this schooling. Guard affairs 
and the instruction of its officers and men 
are in the charge of Regular Army officers 
and enlisted men. One thousand and forty- 
four Regular Army officers and 1,316 en- 
listed men are specially detailed for this 

Of these specially detailed enlisted men 
727 are sergeant instructors. It has a cav- 
alry branch, and on March 1, 1927, had 
10,420 horses. Nine thousand are fed- 
erally owned and 1,400 are State owned. 
It has more now. It has nineteen organ- 
ized air squadrons, with 326 officers and 
766 men. They each averaged seventy-five 
flying hours last year. Pilots in the Regu- 
lar Army average around 200 hours a 
year. The guard acquired recently forty- 
six primary training planes, forty-nine ob- 
servation planes, and twenty-two special 
service or advance training planes, and 
this bill provides for the purchase of fif- 
teen service planes and twenty-five special 
service or advance training planes. It had 




on November 30, 1927, 1,266 artillery 
units, of which 684 were motor drawn. 
These units include harbor defense, anti- 
aircraft artillery; in fact, practically all 
kinds of modern artillery guns. They 
have ambulances, automobiles, tanks, trac- 
tors, trucks, searchlights, and motorized 
vehicles up to 12,666 in number as of De- 
cember 31, 1927. In addition to these, 
the War Department has on hand 9,998 
modern-drawn vehicles of various classes 
for free issue to the guard, and which 
will later be transferred to it. 

The total cost to the federalized guard 
during the past four years has been 
around $52,000,000 per year. This bill 
carries $31,659,101, and with the State 
contributions and free issues the costs will 
be over $51,000,000. This does not mean 
that appropriation is less — free issues are 
merely falling off. 

The per capita cost of members of the 
guard to the Federal Government is 
$175.53 and to the States $77.15, or a 
total of $252.68. These figures do not 
include pay of Kegular Army officers and 
enlisted men and many other items that 
could be properly charged for by the gov- 
ernment. Neither do they include free 
issues running into the millions. The fed- 
eralized guard has on hand property of 
estimated value of $115,000,000, and most 
of this property is free issues. The real 
per capita cost of members of the guard 
is nearer $500 or more. 

I believe I have already said enough 
to convince the skeptical that the federal- 
ized National Guard is a highly efficient 
organization and growing more so daily. 
In some respects it is equally efficient with 
the Regular Army. 

The Organized Reserves is largely an 
officer organization. It is an after-the- 
war thought. Its growth has also been 
rapid. On June 30, 1926, it had 68,232 
officers and no enlisted men. On June 
30, 1926, it had 103,829 officers and 5,775 
enlisted men. On June 30, 1927, it had 
110,014 officers and 5,735 enlisted men. 
Its officer strength increased 6,185 in that 
year, the last one for which available fig- 
ures are possible. 

Certain of these officers, to wit, 16,382, 
have been or will be given training out of 
funds appropriated in the 1928 bill, and 

of this number 627 will have more than 
fifteen days' training. The bill now being 
considered is supposed to provide fifteen 
days' training for 16,000 men and more 
than fifteen days' training for 600 men. 
This committee increased the number to 
be trained over that recommended by the 
Budget by 875 officers. This bill also pro- 
vides for the training of 110 Air Corps 
officers. They will receive one year's in- 
struction. This number will soon increase, 
until the number of 330 is annually 
trained, and shortly afterwards the num- 
ber will go to 550 annually. Reserve offi- 
cers are also given correspondence courses. 
Under this practice up-to-date military 
instruction is provided to them. 

These officers are likewise divided into 
various units, the same as the Regular 
Army and the federalized guard. They 
have Regular Army officers totaling 413 
and 524 enlisted men assigned to their 
instruction and other activities. Of course, 
members of the Organized Reserves are 
officers to start with, and it is not neces- 
sary to furnish them with intensive train- 
ing at all times. 

This organization is likewise growing. 
In 1920 the number of officers was 68,000. 
It remained at this figure for two years. 
In 1923 it went to 76,000; 1924, 81,000; 
1925, 95,000; 1926, 103,000; 1927, 110,- 
000 in round numbers. The increase in 
1927 over 1926 was 7,000, and these in- 
creases will continue at about the same 
rate until the goal of 125,000 is reached. 
This will all be done in spite of the fact 
that only 65,833 of these officers can pos- 
sibly be used in the mobilization of three 
and a half million men. This is not my 
statement. It is the testimony of War De- 
partment officials. They are War Depart- 
ment studies and calculations. 

The Reserve Officers' Training Corps 
are those young men going to college who 
are trained at college in the science of 
war under officers of the War Department. 
They are given four years of military 
training under officers and enlisted men 
of the Regular Army, and certain of the 
advanced students go to Regular Army 
Camps, where they are given fifteen days' 
intensive training. This bill provides for 
the summer training of 7,200 such ad- 
vanced students. 




There are now 125,141 young men wlio 
are in this lieserve Officers' Training 
Corps. This is an increase of 9,000 over 
1928. These young men are given sub- 
sistence allowance at school and are also 
provided with uniforms. They are also di- 
vided into infantry, cavalry, field artillery, 
coast artillery, air corps, engineers, sig- 
nal corps, and other corps units just the 
same as the Eegular Army. They are 
young men well trained in the art of war- 
fare by 685 Regular Army officers, 114 
retired Eegular Army officers, twenty 
warrant officers, 502 active non-ommis- 
sioned officers, twenty-six retired noncom- 
missioned officers, and 388 other enlisted 
men, all from the Regular Army. 

No age limit is placed on these young 
men. Practically all of them are from 
14 to 21 years of age. 

This bill increases the uniform allow- 
ance to the advance classes. This is done 
to popularize military work in the schools 
and to induce the young college man to 
take the advance course and otherwise in- 
crease the number of these officer students 
and ultimately popularize the military 

General Summerall stated that it was 
his hope by doing this to "stabilize the 
units and induce the young men to take 
the last two years ... we want them 
to have something that will inculcate pride 
and make them proud to wear the uni- 

The citizens military training camps are 
provided for the training of citizens gen- 
erally. This activity is regarded by the 
War Department as the least vital from 
a standpoint of national defense. They 
are trained at Regular Army camps. 
Thirty-eight thousand five hundred and 
ninety-seven were trained in 1927. This 
bill provides for the training of 35,000, 
an increase of 5,000 over that recom- 
mended by the budget. An intensive cam- 
paign has to be carried on to secure the 
necessary number of trainees. Army offi- 

cers and enlisted men are in charge of this 
training, all of which is paid for by the 
government out of funds appropriated by 
Congress. One thousand three hundred 
and eighty-five Regular Army officers and 
11,751 enlisted men have been used in 
connection with the yearly training of 
these citizens. They are likewise pro- 
vided with hostesses to look after their 
social affairs and activities and as anti- 
dotes against homesickness. The citizens' 
military training corps likewise has an 
ambitious program. Captain Lord testi- 
fying stated that the plan is to ultimately 
provide for the training of 100,000 such 
citizens ; that he hopes to reach 60,000 by 
1930 or 1931. 

Rifle matches are not included in this 
bill, but this activity will go on in 1930 
and afterwards every two years under pres- 
ent War Department policies. However, 
a bill has recently passed the House pro- 
viding for these matches every year. They 
will cost in the neighborhood of a million 
dollars. The number includes thirty-four 
civilian teams of thirteen men each, or 
442 men. All others that attend these 
matches belong to the Regular Army or 
some other citizen branch of it, or to the 
navy. Some belonging to these citizens' 
rifle clubs range in age between sixty and 
seventy years. These civilan teams come 
from rifle clubs all over the country. 

It will be seen from the statements that 
I have made that we train them almost 
from the cradle to the grave in military 
science and tactics. The total number in 
all of the establishments is over 600,000 — 
an army very much larger in size and 
equipment than the popular notion. It 
must be conceded, however, that some in 
these War Department citizens organiza- 
tions are there purely for propaganda pur- 
poses. However, this does not matter. We 
are face to face with the facts that we 
have a military establishment of over 600,- 
000 men, and its gain in 1928 will be 
in excess of 22,000 officers and men. 

There is an idea abroad among moral people that they should 
make their neighbors good. One person I have to make good: 
myself. But my duty to my neighbor is ... to make him 
happy if I may. — R. L. Stevenson. 





**T HAVE recently received copies of 
X the Advocate of Peace and have 
also received your literature. I can assure 
you that no one more utterly detests war 
than do I. I look back to a morning some 
thirty-four years ago. I was then a boy. 
I was in the library of my school. A few 
larger boys were present. A word was 
spoken. A sort of shiver ran — a chill, 
foreboding — through the room. While 
my father was American, I was educated 
at an English public school, one of those 
schools to which the sons of the better 
class are sent. I there heard all about the 
history of England, and all the way 
through school years I heard war glorified. 
It was war, war, war, from first to last. 
Roman, Dane, Scot, Pict, Anglo, Jute, 
Norman, French, Spanish, Holland, and 
by and by, as the thing called empire grew, 
Eussia, India, Afghanistan, Ashanti, Zu- 
luland — to say nothing of course of the 
American colonies. War, war, war, al- 
ways glorified. War was a part, the great- 
est part, of schoolboy life. There was 
never any of its horror shown; never a 
hint of its brutality. The sword was 
glorious; sword, arrow, shield, lance, 
battle-axe, spear, and, later, culverin and 
musket, rifle, bayonet, bomb, machine- 
gun, were all to be desired — stamps of a 
nation's greatest, of its prowess ; stamp of 
its manhood's worth. So childhood 
learned ! 

"We in America, what have we? What 
do the children of France, of Germany, 
hear? I gee small boys playing at battle 
on the vacant lots near by. In France, 
in Germany, in Britain, little children 
play at battle. Toy battleships float in 
puddles. Enemies lie dead. AH is well. 
The victory is ours ! If ever you are to 
do away with war, you will have to change 
the system that lets youth everywhere 
grow up to the tune of the war bugles. 

"That word that was spoken that bright 
morning in the library of that English 
public school was 'Germany.' The echoes 
of the Crimea had not yet died away. 
Even the rumble of Napoleon's guns, the 
thunder of his cuirassiers, might yet be 

i-Modesto, California, February 15, 1928. 

heard. And all the time little wars went 
on — Ashanti Land, the Soudan, Chitral, 
and so forth. And now, low on the hori- 
zon, 'Germany!'' And thenceforward that 
word was heard ever more frequently. We 
know what has come to the world since. 

"What a fine thing it would be might 
the shame of war be taught to children. 
What a fine thing if they might be taught 
that there are other victories, victories 
more worth while, than those of the battle- 
field ! Battlefield victories, are they ever 
worth while ? How much more worthy of 
our humanity would have been the vic- 
tory of their avoidance ! Broken bones 
and bloody grasses, stained waves every- 
where ! And all, in the minds of the chil- 
dren, fraught with a glory. 

"What do our children hear of the 
worth of the Indian whom we have swept 
from his plain? No son of any flag is 
ever allowed to know that on that flag 
there has ever been a stain. 

"It seems to me that mankind is come 
to a cross-roads today. Bloody roads 
stretch far behind him. Two roads stretch 
before — one bright, one darker yet than 
any road has ever been. It seems to me 
today that this nation, born for a hope to 
men, holds destiny in its hands. On one 
side, watching, stands Hope; and on the 
other Despair. 

"How to go forward, how to choose 
which road to take, I cannot say. That is 
for wiser minds. I am no politician; I 
am one of the mass. We of the mass, so 
many of us, are Oh so weary of shadows 
on the sun, and there are many of us who, 
leaving everything to our leaders, just 
don't think. 

"Today it seems to me that another day 
has come similar to that day when first I 
heard the word 'Germany' and sensed the 
shiver that wakened. I pick up a paper 
here, a periodical there, and I sense 
another shiver. Men in high places whis- 
per 'England' — war on the far, far hori- 
zon, this time between America and Eng- 
land ! 

God forbid that I or any man should 
magnify the mutter of diseased imagina- 
tion into the awful terror of an actuality ; 
but I cannot forget that other day. Let 
us look in the face of woe and see if it 
cannot be turned to a brightness. Some 
means of escape must be found. 




"The man in the street is grown some- 
what cynical of Teace Palaces/ of Hagues, 
and Genevas, and the man in the street 
is fond of forgetting, of ignoring. There 
are so many things to amuse; so we play 
while the shadows rise. We are children, 

"We old generations have made a grand 
mess of things. We have founded our 
civilizations upon foundations that rust. 
Instead of trying to remodel our building 
by taking things down from the top, we 
should do well to build us a new temple 
on a surer foundation — education. 

"This is too great a matter for a letter, 
and I am a poor craftsman ; but for God's 
sake, unless mankind is ere long to throw 
all belief in a God of mercy and gracious- 
ness to the discard, do something about it ! 

"I live on a street where dwell the sons 
of many nations. We dwell all under one 
flag — a flag in the birth of which arose a 
hope for humanity. We are neighbors to- 
gether, helping one another in our griefs, 
sharing our joys. Shall never the day 
come when the nations that gave us birth 
can live as we, their children, live? 
Surely humanity is greater than these 
boundaries we have made? Surely a "way 
may yet be found whereby nations all over 
the earth may dwell in peace? 

"Realizing all too well the intricacies 
of commerce, the jealousies that, caused 
by them, rankle, I shiver. Our civiliza- 
tion seems to have grown beyond our con- 
trol. The cross-roads stretch before us. 

"Idealism is regarded as a foolish fet- 
ish, Utopia as a silly dream; yet unless 
we seek IJtopia we are lost. If ever we are 
to do away with mankind's greatest vil- 
lainy, war, we must change the system 
that lets youth grow up to the tune of the 
war bugles. 

"You know all this as well as I. I tell 
an old, stale tale. What is to be done 
about it? This world won't last forever. 
Shall its children welter to the last in 
blood ? 

"A hard matter ; for I, too, thrill to the 
tune of the war bugle. The sound of sol- 
diers marching sets my pulses racing. Be- 
ing human, I delight in conflict. The old 
savage throbs within me. As a child, I 
gloried in my father's tales of Sherman 
riding to the sea. And yet, deep within 

me, lies the consciousness that could it 
have by any upright means been found, 
peace would have been the better way. 
Had I a son I should feel all shame did 
he not leap to the first call for men, so are 
we carried away by our patriotisms. And 
yet, after all, what is patriotism? Is it 
not, when one has sifted the matter aU 
over, a love for humanity rather than a 
love for just one nation ? Is it not a love 
for universal justice ? And, when we have 
well sifted all this matter over, was ever 
a war really just? 

"Looking back on history, can we not 
see that, had men been a little patient, a 
little willing for self-sacrifice, war might 
somehow have been avoided? There is, I 
think; there was, I think, always justice 
on one side ; perhaps not always, for there 
have been many wars from naught but 
desire for self on both sides. We in Amer- 
ica asked but justice when we chose our 
way; that we know; that the whole earth 
knows. We chose and took our way. We 
have grown to the leadership of the na- 
tions, to where, at any rate, the leader- 
ship, it seems to me, may well be ours. 

"One might think for a month, might 
write for a month his thoughts. One can 
but pray, pray that the dark blot hover- 
ing on our horizon may be dissipated by 
the glory of a newly rising sun. 

"As I have already said, there seems a 
shiver in the air today. I think that the 
President of these United States will ere 
long have a question weightier than any 
other question faced by any President yet 
has been. I think that he has it now. I 
think that our aspirations must ere long 
come to their greatest trial. One cannot 
hesitate at cross-roads. 

"The American Peace Society, through 
justice, may the God of our fathers, a 
God of graciousness indeed, show you the 

"One of our greatest infamies these 
days is propaganda — black propaganda! 
We saw enough of it during the war; or, 
if we did not suspect it then, we at least 
see it plainly now. There is also a white 
propaganda. Unlike the black type, there 
is nothing of cowardice about it. It is in- 
deed the world's bright, best hope. It is 
yours. May you prosper !" 





(From a Correspondent Lately in America) 

HAVING just returned from a pro- 
longed tour in the United States, 
I should like to confirm the statements 
made by your Washington correspondent 
in your issue of January 24 about the 
effect of the Geneva failure. President 
Coolidge and his colleagues were, as your 
correspondent says, "profoundly disturbed 
and greatly annoyed" by the failure, and 
they believe that the British Government 
— or rather that dominant section of it — 
deliberately decided to "challenge" the 
United States and broke off the confer- 
ence accordingly. And that conviction is 
based largely upon Mr. Winston Church- 
ill's speech rejecting "mathematical par- 
ity" and Lord Cecil's speech in the House 
of Lorda. 

I have no doubt that to the aver- 
age Briton the legend of British "Chal- 
lenge" to the United States in August 
last sounds like the raving of a lunatic; 
yet it is solemnly believed in Washington. 
But the legends of the lunatic asylum are 
not confined to Washington; they extend 
equally to London. I have found just 
as abysmal misconceptions of the Ameri- 
can standpoint on this side of the Atlan- 
tic as I have of the British standpoint on 
the other side of the Atlantic. The Geneva 
Conference not only failed to yield a naval 
agreement, but succeeded in producing 
an entirely erroneous impression in the 
two nations about the attitude of the 
other, which the war-mongers everywhere 
are busily trying to exploit. 

British Insecurity 

It is impossible in a short article to 
discuss the matter in detail. I will con- 
fine myself to stating what seem to me 
the fundamental misunderstandings. On 
the American side there is absolutely no 
comprehension that their basic demand 
was a demand that the British Common- 
wealth should accept an interpretation of 
parity which in fact would give the United 
States the right to permanent supremacy 
by sea, and that this was the reason for 
the rejection of their proposals by Great 
Britain. Nor, in a position of absolute 

security themselves, do they understand 
the relative insecurity of the far-flung 
British Commonwealth. Nor do they real- 
ize that it was their own insistence on 
the 10,000-ton ship armed with 8-inch 
guns, resisted by Great Britain at both 
the Washington and the Geneva Confer- 
ences, which made large tonnage demands 
by Great Britain at Geneva practically 
inevitable for reasons of security. I think 
that the inner group in the United States 
Navy Board understood the significance 
of the 10-000-ton 8-inch gun ship per- 
fectly; it was their business to do so, and 
I don't blame them for it ; but I am pretty 
certain that the statesmen of Washing- 
ton have not yet grasped that their in- 
sistence on the right to put the total 
cruiser tonnage into a type of cruiser 
which can annihilate the type of cruiser 
which we must build because of our geo- 
graphical needs was, in fact, a demand 
that the United States should have the 
right to create an instrument of war 
which could destroy the interior communi- 
cations of the British Empire — a demand 
which naturally had no chance whatever 
of being accepted by Parliament. 

But on the British side there is equally 
no comprehension that the British Govern- 
ment on its side invited the United States 
to accept an interpretation of parity which 
it was equally impossible for Congress to 
approve. The United States believes she 
has an absolute moral right to "parity" 
because it was acceptance by Great Britain 
of the all-round standard of parity at 
Washington which alone led the United 
States to agree to break up twelve super- 
dreadnaughts of about 43,000 tons each, in 
various stages of construction, on which 
she had spent hundreds of millions of dol- 
lars, and which she believes would have 
given her sea supremacy if they had been 
completed. Their strong feeling about our 
laying down fourteen 10,000-ton 8-inch 
gun cruisers against their own two since 
1923 is that our program is really a 
breach, not of the terms, but of the spirit 

♦January 30, 1928. 




of a solemn bargain, and that our insist- 
ence on maintaining it made "economy" 
impossible. There obviously was not the 
slightest chance of securing approval from 
Congress for the British interpretation of 
parity — that is, that the number of 10,- 
000-ton cruisers should be limited to 
twelve, and that no other cruisers should 
be larger than 6,000 tons and armed with 
6-inch guns, because that implied that 
the United States, in order to attain par- 
ity, would have had to spend vast sums 
on constructing ships which they were ad- 
vised by their Navy Board were entirely 
unsuited to their needs, while at the end 
of it Great Britain would still have had 
almost complete supremacy at sea out- 
side the Western Atlantic and the North 

"Mathematical Parity" 

The truth is that at Geneva both sides 
rejected "mathematical parity," that the 
problem of determining what "parity" is 
is still unsolved, but that Lord Cecil is 
perfectly right in saying that an agree- 
ment could have been reached if Great 
Britain had been less insistent on the 
United States having no more 10,000-ton 
cruisers than herself, and if the United 
States had been less insistent on their 
all being armed with 8-inch guns. 

There is nothing to be done about the 
misimderstanding at present. The only 
serious objection to the New American 
naval program is that it has been formu- 
lated in anger — an anger which I believe 
will be seen to be quite unwarranted 
when the full complexity of the problem 
of determining "parity," which was so 
lightly confided to the Geneva Conference, 
is really understood. The overwhelming 
mass of the American people are perfectly 
friendly to Great Britain and do not 
dream of the possibility of war; but they 
do not mean to have a navy second to 
anybody else's, and I believe your corre- 
spondent is right in saying that the pres- 
ent program will be approved in substan- 
tially its present form. We ought to say 
and do nothing to try to influence the 
United States in any way until they have 
decided for themselves what addition to 
their own navy they wish to make. 

But, once that decision is taken and the 
question of parity is thereby out of the 

way, a serious, if unostentatious, effort 
should be made to consider Anglo-Ameri- 
can relations in that broad political way 
which ought to have been undertaken be- 
fore ever the Geneva Conference assem- 
bled. My own view is that, looked at from 
a more imperial angle on our side and 
a more international angle on the Amer- 
ican side, the interests of the United 
States and of Great Britain are almost 
identical, and that when that is under- 
stood we shall both have not larger but 
smaller navies, and shall both see that 
they ought to be used to support interna- 
tional peace through arbitration and not 
in competition. 

But an essential step in that direction 
is to find some means for bringing the 
jjolitical leaders of the two countries into 
some kind of personal contact. The im- 
provement in the European situation in 
the last few years is largely due to the 
confidential personal relations which have 
been established between Sir Austen 
Chamberlain, M. Briand, and Herr Strese- 
mann. There is no such contact between 
London and Washington today, and it is 
difficult to see how it can be brought 
about. Yet if Mr. Baldwin could spend a 
couple of days with President Coolidge 
and Sir Austen Chamberlain with Mr. 
Kellogg, I believe that the present mi- 
asma of understanding would rapidly dis- 
appear in a cordial recognition of the real, 
though by no means unsurmountable, dif- 
ficulty of the problems to be solved, and 
that the growing war talk of admirals and 
big-navy propagandists would be recog- 
nized as the grotesque absurdity which it 
really is. 

Referring to the above article, the Editor of the 
London Times wrote an editorial as follows : 


A CORRESPONDENT who has re- 
cently traveled through the United 
States and is a keen and intelligent ob- 
server of national tendencies, describes 
in an adjacent column his impression of 
the effect of the failure of the Geneva 
Naval Conference on Anglo-American re- 
lations. He takes a serious but by no 
means a pessimistic view. Like him, we 
have ourselves urged from the first that, 
the Geneva Conference having failed, the 




only Bensible course was to recognize a 
complete liberty of action for both sides 
within the still revelant provisions of the 
Washington Agreement; that is to say, 
since the attempt to supplement the 
Washington Agreement by an agreement 
for limitation of the construction of cruis- 
ers and other craft did not prove suc- 
cessful, nothing is to be gained either by 
recrimination or by any futile harking 
back. For the present, until some new 
opportunity naturally arises in the prog- 
ress of events for a fresh consultation on 
naval issues, each nation — Great Britain 
and the United States — must go its own 
way and determine its own naval policy 
in accordance with its own conception of 
the needs of national defense, without 
any too close consideration of what the 
other is doing. For many reasons it has 
been thought advisable by our government 
to delay the execution of the current 
cruiser program. That decision is gen- 
erally approved. In the United States, on 
the other hand, Congress now has under 
consideration a bill providing for heavy 
expenditure on an immediate increase in 
the strength of the American navy, par- 
ticularly in large 10,000-ton cruisers. All 
the prospects are that the bill will be 
passed by both houses of Congress — in 
spite of the protests of that minority who 
think, like Senator Borah, that such ac- 
tion, in the present condition of the world, 
is "sheer madness" — and this is, of course, 
entirely the affair of the American peo- 
ple, their representatives in Congress, and 
their government. Nothing can usefully 
be said from this side either in approval 
or in criticism of a determination greatly 
to increase the strength of the American 
navy. Naturally, the motive is not quite 
understood in this country, and that be- 
cause it is impossible for British people 
exactly to appreciate all the factors in- 
volved — whether political and economic 
interests, financial capacity, or national 
feeling. But just as we, with due regard 
to existing treaties, feel ourselves wholly 
at liberty to frame and carry out all rea- 
sonable technical plans for the defense of 
the British Empire, so we could not dream 
of resenting the fact that the United 
States has exactly the same liberty in de- 
termining her own naval requirements. 

A frank and mutual recognition of com- 
plete freedom in this respect is the first 
step towards a clearer understanding. 

For the present, naval developments 
must take their course. A good deal of 
harm has already been done by Lord 
Cecil's interpretation of the proceedings 
at the Geneva Conference. The Big Navy 
group at Washington have found in it just 
the political weapon which they wanted to 
influence wavering minds in favor of their 
schemes. There can be no doubt that this 
criticism of our government's attitude on 
that occasion has greatly influenced Amer- 
ican opinion in favor of the program for 
a very substantial sea armament, and has 
strengthened the anti-British tendencies 
of its advocates. Sir Herbert Samuel has 
adopted Lord Cecil's view for the pur- 
poses of the Liberal campaign; Labor, on 
occasion, takes up the cry; an inter- 
national misunderstanding is again being 
used and fomented for party reasons. It 
is really an extraordinary state of affairs. 
Enthusiasts for disarmament, by their 
misdirected attacks upon their own gov- 
ernment, are actually stimulating a move- 
ment for a large increase of naval arma- 
ments in another country. As a matter of 
plain fact, the British delegation at the 
Geneva Conference did make a sincere and 
strenuous effort to reach agreement in very 
difficult circumstances. The conference 
was not called by Great Britain. She did 
not lay down the conditions of the de- 
bate. The American thesis on which dis- 
cussion had to center was not revealed 
until the conference met. Our delegation 
had to adapt itself to the exigencies of 
a prescribed program in formulating 
which it had no share. It appeared in 
the course of the debate that certain fun- 
damental questions ought to have been 
threshed out beforehand — more particu- 
larly that difficult question of "parity," 
to which our correspondent refers today, 
and which has been the chief cause of 
misunderstanding. The difference between 
the "parity" that means an effective equal- 
ity in British and American naval strength 
and the "mathematical parity" that 
would put an American navy in a posi- 
tion to threaten the internal communica- 
tions of the British Empire, has yet to 
he fully explained both to the British and 




the American public. It ought to be pos- 
sible to reach a clear understanding on 
this point, and there is no reason to sup- 
pose — in spite of the present setback, in 
spite of the launching of a big American 
naval program in a presidential election 
year, when political excitement runs high 
— that in time, with care and under more 
favorable conditions, the narrow contro- 
versy over tonnage and guns will not be 
forgotten in a broader mutual comprehen- 
sion of vital issues. The world is small 
and in that world the British Empire and 
the United States must play too large a 
part together to quarrel seriously. It may 
not indeed be altogether a disadvantage 
that this naval misunderstanding has once 
more concentrated attention on the very 
important question of Anglo-American re- 
lationships and has made it necessary that 
they should be reviewed and established 
afresh on a firmer basis. 

The problem, of course, is far easier to 
state than to solve. Our correspondent 
sums up his impressions by declaring that 
many difficulties will be overcome through 
fuller and franker intercourse between 
Great Britain and the United States. He 
is obviously right. As we pointed out at 
the time, the failure at Geneva might 
have been avoided if there had been any 
opportunity for informal and confidential 
consultation beforehand. But it is just 
this question of intercourse that presents 
peculiar difficulties. In a general sense, 
the intercourse between the British and 
the American peoples is fuller and more 
constant than between any other two peo- 
ples on the face of the earth. Through 
frequent visits, through associations in 
business and finance, through literature, 

science, and philanthropy, contact between 
British and Americans is close and in- 
tense. What is seriously lacking is a cor- 
responding facility of political intercourse, 
and this defect may easily lead to politi- 
cal misunderstandings which would jeop- 
ardize all the rest. It is perfectly true, as 
our correspondent points out, that there 
is little direct contact between British 
statesmen and the statesmen of the 
United States. Europe has found a 
remedy for many of its ills in frequent 
meetings between its foreign ministers. 
The condition of Europe is far better 
than it was a few years ago, largely 
because Sir Austen Chamberlain, M. Bri- 
and, and Herr Stresemann are close per- 
sonal friends and continually exchange 
views on a variety of problems. It is not 
so easy to meet American statesmen. They 
are far away, and for them, in view of 
the present state of American opinion, 
Geneva is forbidden ground. Yet it is of 
the greatest importance for the immediate 
future of the world that political con- 
tact between the British Empire and the 
United States should be full, frequent, 
and easy. It is important not merely for 
our own country and for the Empire, but 
for Europe, which is scrutinizing in some 
perplexity the rapid growth in the United 
States of a new type of civilization. The^ 
methods for promoting political inter- 
course cannot be invented in a day. The 
Dominions can help, particularly Canada. 
The essential thing is that attention 
should be directed at present, not to the 
different shipbuilding programs, but to 
the broader possibilities of promoting an 
ultimate and deeper understanding. 

The Trees That Died in the War 

To G. H. G. 

So gentle they, yet glorious. 

Living their lives unseen; 
Treading the soil, victorious, 

Brave gods with banners green. 

They asked for naught but the pleasure 
Of serving the sons of men, 

Lavish with leafy treasure 

When Spring should come again. 

What answered we to their yearning ? 

What gave we for their cheer? 
Hatred and shells and burning. 

Death in the Spring of the year. 

Gone like a vanished city, 

Tragic and far as Greece. 
God! Shall they give us pity? 

Men ! Shall they bring us peace ? 
— From London Spectator. 







The President of the United States of 
America and the President of the French 
Republic, determined to prevent, so far as 
in their power lies, any interruption in the 
peaceful relations that have happily existed 
between the two nations for more than a 
century; desirous of reaffirming their adher- 
ence to the policy of submitting to impartial 
decision all justiciable controversies that 
may arise between them; eager by their ex- 
ample not only to demonstrate their con- 
demnation of war as an instrimient of 
national policy in their mutual relations, 
but also to hasten the time when the perfec- 
tion of international arrangements for the 
pacific settlement of international disputes 
shall have eliminated forever the possibility 
of war among any of the powers of the 
world; having in mind the treaty signed at 
Washington on September 15, 1914, to facili- 
tate the settlement of disputes between the 
United States of America and France, have 
decided to conclude a new treaty of arbitra- 
tion, enlarging the scope of the arbitration 
convention signed at Washington on Febru- 
ary 10, 1908, which expires by limitation on 
February 27, 1928, and promoting the cause 
of arbitration, and for that purpose they 
have appointed as their respective plenipo- 
tentiaries : 

The President of the United States of 
America, Mr. Robert E. Olds, Acting Secre- 
tary of State, and the President of the 
French Republic, His Excellency M!r. Paul 
Claudel, Ambassador Extraordinary and 
Plenipotentiary of the French Republic to 
the United States, who, having communi- 
cated to one another their full powers, found 
in good and due form, have agreed upon the 
following articles : 

Article I 

Any disputes arising between the Govern- 
ment of the United States of America and 

the Government of the French Republic, of 
whatever nature they may be, shall, when 
ordinary diplomatic proceedings have failed 
and the high contracting parties do not have 
recourse to adjudication by a compeftent 
tribunal, be submitted for Investigation and 
report, as prescribed in the treaty signed af 
Washington September 15, 1914, to the Per- 
manent International Commission consti- 
tuted pursuant thereto. 

Article II 

All differences relating to international 
matters in which the high contracting par- 
ties are concerned by virtue of a claim of 
right made by one against the other, under 
treaty or otherwise, which it has not been 
possible to adjust by diplomacy, which have 
not been adjusted as a result of reference 
to the above-mentioned Permanent Interna- 
tional Commission, and which are justiciable 
in their nature by reason of being suscepti- 
ble of decision by the application of the 
principles of law or equity, shall be submit- 
ted to the Permanent Court of Arbitration 
established at The Hague by the convention 
of October 18, 1907, or to some other com- 
petent tribunal, as shall be decided in each 
case by special agreement, which special 
agreement shall provide for the organization 
of such tribunal if necessary, define its pow- 
ers, state the question or questions at issue, 
and settle the terms of reference. 

The special agreement in each case shall 
be made on the part of the United States of 
America by the Pi-esident of the United 
States of America by and with the advice 
and consent of the Senate thereof, and on 
the part of France in accordance with the 
constitutional laws of France. 

Article III 

The provisions of this treaty shall not be 
invoked in respect of any dispute the subject- 
matter of which (a) is within the domestic 
jurisdiction of either of the high contracting 
parties; (&) involves the interests of third 
parties; (c) depends upon or involves the 




maintenance of the traditional attitude of 
the United States concerning American ques- 
tions, commonly described as the Monroe 
Doctrine; (d) depends upon or involves the 
observance of the obligations of France in 
accordance with the covenant of the League 
of Nations. 

Article IV 

The present treaty shall be ratified by the 
President of the United States of America 
by and with the advice and consent of the 
Senate thereof, and by the President of the 
French Republic in accordance with the con- 
stitutional laws of the French Republic. 

The ratifications shall be exchanged at 
Washington as soon as possible, and the 
treaty shall take effect on the date of the 
exchange of the ratifications. It shall thei'e- 
after remain in force continuously unless 
and until terminated by one year's written 
notice given by either high contracting party 
to the other. 

In faith thereof the respective plenipoten- 
tiaries have signed this treaty in duplicate 
in the English and French languages, both 
texts having equal force, and hereunto affix 
their seals. 

Done at Washington the sixth day of Feb- 
ruary, in the year of our Lord one thousand 
nine hundred and twenty-eight. 

Robert E. Olds, [seal.] 
Claudel. [seal.] 


(Note. — Following is the text of the treaty 
between Great Britain and Iraq, signed in 
London on December 14. The preamble of 
the treaty declares that the parties, recogniz- 
ing that the treaties of alliance of October 
10, 1922, and January 1.3, 1926, are no longer 
appropriate, in view of the altered circum- 
stances and of the progress made by the 
Kingdom of Iraq, have agreed to conclude a 
new treaty "on terms of equality.") 

Article 1. His Britannic Majesty recog- 
nizes Iraq as an indei>endent sovereign State. 

Article 2. There shall be peace and friend- 
ship between His Britannic Majesty and His 
Majesty the King of Iraq. Each of the high 
contracting parties undertakes to observe 
friendly relations towards the other and to 
do his best to prevent in his own country any 
unlawful activities affecting peace or order 
within the other's territory. 

Article 3. His Majesty the King of Iraq 

undertakes to secure the execution of all in- 
ternational obligations which His Britannic 
Majesty has undertaken to see carried out in 
respect of Iraq. 

His Majesty the King of Iraq undertakes 
not to modify the existing provisions of the 
Iraq organic law in such a manner as ad. 
versely to affect the rights and interests of 
foreigners or as to constitute any difference 
in rights before the law among Iraqis on the 
ground of difterence of race, religion, or lan- 

Article 4. There shall be full and frank 
consultation between the high contracting 
parties in all matters of foreign policy which 
may affect their common interests. 

Article 5. His Majesty the King of Iraq 
agrees to place His Britannic Majesty's High 
Commissioner in a position to give informa- 
tion to His Britannic Majesty regarding the 
progress of events in Iraq and the projects 
and proposals of the Iraq Government, and 
the High Commissioner will bring to the 
notice of his ^lajesty the King of Iraq any 
matter which His Britannic Majesty con- 
siders might prejudicially affect the well- 
being of Iraq or the obligations entered into 
under this treaty. 

Article 0. His Majesty the King of Iraq 
undertakes, so soon as local conditions in 
Iraq permit, to accede to all general interna, 
tional agreements already existing or which 
may be concluded hereafter with the ap- 
proval of the league of Nations in respect of 
the following: 

The slave trade ; the traffic in drugs ; the 
traffic in arms and munitions; the traffic in 
women and children ; commercial equality ; 
freedom of transit and navigation; atrial 
navigation ; postal, telegraphic, or wireless 
communication, and measures for the protec- 
tion of literature, art, or industries. 

His Majesty the King of Iraq further un- 
dertakes to execute the provisions of the 
following instruments in so far as they apply 
to Iraq : The Covenant of the League of 
Nations, the Treaty of Lausanne, the Anglo- 
French Boundary Convention, the San Renio 
Oil Agreement. 

Article 7. His Majesty the King of Iraq 
undertakes to co-operate, in so far as social, 
religious, and other conditions may permit, in 
the execution of any common policy adopted 
by the League of Nations for preventing and 
combating disease, including diseases of 
plants and animals. 




Article 8. Provided the present rate of 
progress in Iraq is maintained and all goes 
well in the interval, His Britannic Majesty- 
will support the candidature of Iraq for ad- 
mission to the League of Nations in 1932. 

Article 9. There shall be no discrimination 
in Iraq against the nationals of any State, 
member of the League of Nations, or of any 
State to which His Majesty the King of Iraq 
has agreed by treaty that the same rights 
should be ensured as it would enjoy if it 
were a member of the said League (includ- 
ing companies incorporated under the laws of 
such State), as compared with those of any 
other foreign State in matters concerning 
taxation, commerce, or navigation, the exer- 
cise of industries or professions, or in the 
treatment of merchant vessels or civil air. 

Nor shall there be any discrimination in 
Iraq against goods originating in or destined 
for any of the said States. 

Article 10. His Britannic Majesty under- 
takes, at the request of His Majesty the 
King of Iraq, and on his behalf, to continue 
the protection of Iraqi nationals in foreign 
countries in which His Majesty the King of 
Iraq is not represented. 

Article 11. Nothing in this treaty shall 
affect the validity of the contracts concluded 
and in existence between the Iraq Govern- 
ment and British officials; in every respect 
those contracts shall be interpreted as if the 
British officials' agreement of March 25, 1924, 
were in existence. 

Article 12. A separate agreement shall 
regulate the financial relations between the 
high contracting parties. This agreement 
shall supersede the financial agreement of 
March 25, 1924, corresponding with the 19th 

day of Sha'ban, 1342, Hijrah, which shall 
thereupon cease to have effect. 

Article 13. A. separate agreement shall 
regulate the military relations between the 
high contracting parties. This agreement 
shall supersede the military agreement of 
March 25, 1924, corresponding with the 19th 
day of Sha'ban, 1342, Hijrah, which shall 
thereupon cease to have effect. 

Article 14. Mis Majesty the King of Iraq 
undertakes to maintain in force the judicial 
agreement signed on March 25, 1924, corre- 
sponding to the 19th day of Sha'ban, 1342. 

Article 15. Any difference that may arise 
between the high contracting parties as to 
the interpretation of the provisions of this 
treaty shall be referred to the Permanent 
Court of International Justice provided for 
by Article 14 of the Covenant of the League 
of Nations. In such case, should there be 
any discrepancy between the English and the 
Arabic texts of this treaty, the English shall 
be taken as the authoritative version. 

Article 16. This treaty shall come into 
force as soon as it has been ratified and rati- 
fications have been exchanged in accordance 
with the constitutional methods of the two 
countries, and shall be subject to review with 
the object of making all modifications re- 
quired by the circumstances, when Iraq en- 
ters the League of Nations in accordance 
with the provisions of Article 8 of this treaty. 
Tills treaty shall replace the treaties of alli- 
ance signed at Baghdad on October 10, 1922, 
corresponding with the 19th day of Sa'far, 
1341, Hijrah, and on January 13, 1926, cor- 
responding with the 28th day of Jamadi-al- 
Ukhra, 1344, Hijrah, which shall cease to 
have effect upon the entry into force of this 


(This year marking the centennial of the American Peace Society) 
By Alice Lawky Gould 

We who were blind have glimpsed a wondrous 

For though it be but dimly, we have seen 
Out of the darkness where dispair had been, 
Men as trees walking in the blessed light. 

And we shall sometime know them as they 

Not trees, nor beasts that hate and fear and 

But seekers of true reason and of right. 
All undistorted by the blight of war. 

Dear Ix)rd, let not Thy ministrations cease: 

Lay yet aagiu Thy hand upon our eyes 

That we may see quite clearly which way lies 

The road to lasting universal peace. 

And let our grateful exultation be 

That whereas we were blind, we see, we see ! 




News in Brief 

Gaffbon, the new German Ambassador, pre- 
sented his credentials to President Coolidge 
on January 31. 

FoTJB Pak^-Amebican confebences were held 
during the last six months of 1927. The 
third Pan-American Congress of Architects 
met in Buenos Aires, July 2-10; the eighth 
Pan-American Sanitary Conference met in 
Lima, Peru, October 12-20; the fifth Pan- 
American Child Congress met in Havana, 
December 8-13; the first Pan-American Con- 
ference on Eugenics and Homoculture met in 
Havana, December 21-23. 

A Pan-Pacific Women's Oonfeeence will 
be held in Honolulu, under the auspices of 
the Pan-Pacific Union, August 2-12, 1928, In- 
vitations have been sent to all governments 
of countries bordering on the Pacific. 

The coubse of the pboposed Adbiatio 
BAIL WAY has now been definitely fixed by the 
Yugoslav Government. It will run from Bel- 
grade to Cattaro by the way of Mitrovitza 
instead of by Vishegrad, as originally in- 
tended. Parts of this route are already 
under construction and the work can be 
pushed to completion with this decision. 

The beteothal has been announced of 
Prince Chichibu, of Japan, and Miss Matsu- 
daira, daughter of the Japanese Ambassador 
to the United States. President Coolidge 
sent to the Emperor of Japan, on January 
20, his cordial felicitations on the event. 

The Fbench aviatoes, Dieudonn^ Costes 
and Joseph Lebrix, who made a nonstop 
flight from Africa to South America, who 
toured the capitals of Latin America, and 
met Colonel Lindbergh in Panama, reached 
Washington on February 8. An enthusiastic 
crowd assembled on Boiling Field to wel- 
come the "Good-will" fliers, including the 
Secretaries of Navy, War, and Commerce, 
together with numerous undersecretaries, 
leaders of the Senate and House, and Am- 

bassador Claudel of France, with his family 
and secretaries. 

A Confebence on Intebnational Rela- 
tions was held in Buffalo, New York, Feb- 
ruary 16-18. Organizations co-operating in 
this conference were the Buffalo and Erie 
County branches of the American Associa- 
tion of University Women, Council of Catho- 
lic Women, Council of Churches (Committee 
on International Good-will), Federation of 
Women's Clubs, Foreign Policy Association, 
Interchurch Council of Women, League of 
Women Voters, Women's Christian Temper- 
ance Union, Women's Temple Society of 
Temple Beth-Zion, and Young Women's 
Christian Association. 


F0ECE8 to intervene in domestic affairs of any 
foreign country. Representative McSwain, of 
South Carolina, introduced, February 10, the 
following joint resolution: 

Resolved by the Senate and House of Rep- 
resentatives of the United States of America 
in Congress assembled, That neither the 
President of the United States nor any offi- 
cer of the United States shall order, com- 
mand, or permit the use or employment of 
any part of the armed forces of the United 
States for the purpose of intervening in 
the domestic affairs of any foreign country, 
save and except only when the need for pro- 
tecting the lives and persons of citizens of 
the United States temporarily and lawfully 
in such foreign country is so urgent as not 
to admit of assembling the Congress. 

The League of Nations Committee on 
Security and Arbitration met in Geneva on 
February 20. The Soviet Government sent 
an observer to the meeting. 

Afteb the signing of the new abbitba- 
tion tbeaty with France, the United States 
proposes to suggest similar treaties with 
other countries as their present treaties ex- 
pire. Great Britain and Japan will be among 
the first to be approached. Germany, with 
which this country has no arbitration treaty 
at present, will, according to Secretary Kel- 
logg, be asked to negotiate a treaty of similar 

The new Bolivian Ministeb to the 
United States, Dr. Diez de Medina, pre- 
sented his credentials to the President on 
February 10. In his remarks on that oc- 
casion he spoke feelingly of the need of 




Bolivia for a seaport. Since that time the 
action taken at Havana permitting Bolivia 
to receive in war time ammunition and arms 
through neutral territory seems to Bolivian 
officials a partial solution of the geographical 


providing for the obligatory arbitration of all 
disputes, without exception, was signed Janu- 
ary 21. 

Abgentina and Brazil decreed in January 
the return to Paraguay of all trophies of war 
captured in the war which the triple alli- 
ance — Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay — 
fought In 1869 against Paraguay. Brazil has 
lately remitted the war debt due from Para- 
guay because of this war, Uruguay having 
done the same thing forty years ago. 

Uruguay put in force, on February 3, a 
new law of nationality, under which a for- 
eigner may become naturalized and still 
retain allegiance to his native land. 

The newly electeh) President of Costa 
Rica, Mr. Cleto Gonzalez Vlquez, will be in- 
augurated May 8. The elections took place 
in February, with no disturbance of the 
peace, the vote being 41,000 against 28,000. 

Spain returned to Cuba, through the 
Cuban minister in Madrid, on February 16, 
the trophies of war captured in Cuba's war 
of independence. 

JuAif Buebo, former Minister of Foreign 
Affairs of Uruguay, assumed late in Janu- 
ary the newly created position of juridical 
adviser to the League of Nations. He will 
direct the legal section of the League. 

The nbw buildings of the Egyptian Uni- 
versity, on the eighty-five-acre site south- 
west of Cairo, have been begun. These will 
house the faculties of literature, law, and 
natural sciences. There will also be exten- 
sive playing fields. 

The American Ambassador to Germany, 
Mr. Schurman, is collecting funds from 
Americans to restore and enlarge the Uni- 
versity of Heidelberg. 

Representatives of twenty Canadian 
AND American chambers of commerce on 

both sides of the Niagara River met io Buf- 
, falo in February for the purpose of co-oper- 
ating in the development of the Niagara 
frontier. The delegates are looking forward 
to the final establishment of an international 
city in that region. 

The Algerian program for the construc- 
tion of Sahara Desert routes, divided into 
northern and southern sections, is already 
under way. These routes will facilitate 
traveling for tourists across the desert. 

Reopening of negotiations to join the 
World Court was requested of the President 
January 23 by the National Committee on 
the Cause and Cure of War, which is com- 
posed of nine women's organizations. On 
February 6 Senator Gillett, of Massachusetts, 
introduced a resolution in the Senate which 
looks to the same end. His resolution was 
referred to the Committee on Foreign Rela- 

The Division of Protocol, a new division 
in the Department of State, began to func- 
tion on February 7. This department will 
be in charge of the reception of ambas.sadors 
and ministers and of general diplomatic pro- 
cedure. The division is in charge of James 
O. Dunn, master of ceremonies at the White 

Italy has signified, through hee Am- 
bassador to the United States, that she de- 
sires to negotiate a new treaty to take the 
place of the Root Treaty, which expired 
some time ago. The Department of State is 
authority for the statement that negotiations 
will be taken up shortly. 

A "Palace of France," some thirty-five 
stories high, a hotel, mainly for French 
travelers, is to be erected on Mfth Avenue, 
New York City, at a cost of $20,000,000. 

The new American legation at Tirana, 
Albania, will be built, on an actual cost 
basis, by students of the Albanian Vocational 
School of that city. This school was founded 
and is supported by the American Junior 
Red Cross. 

Thirty-six communions now have com- 
missions on international relations, and fifty- 
seven state and city councils of churches and 




other intercommunion bodies have similar 
committees, it is stated by the Federal Coun- 
cil of Churches of Christ in America. 

The tax on the embarkation and debar- 
kation of passengers at French ports is now 
in effect at Cherbourg. The proceeds of this 
tax are to be turned over quarterly to the 
marine pension fund. 

General Josfi Maria Moncada and Dr. 
Antonio Medrano, Judge of the Supreme 
Court of Nicaragua, were unanimously nom- 
inated for president and vice-president, re- 
spectively, by the national convention of the 
Liberal Party of Nicaragua on February 19. 
General Moncada led the liberal armies sup- 
porting Dr. Juan Sacassa against the forces 
of Adolfo Diaz until the representative of 
I'resident Coolidge, Henry L. Stimson, nego- 
tiated an armistice last May. Under this 
agreement President Diaz continues in office 
to the end of his term, in 1928, while a Nica- 
raguan constabulary, commanded by Ameri- 
can officers, together with the U. S. Marines, 
attempted the pacification of the country. 
On the recommendation of General Moncada, 
all the liberal commanders except Sandino 
laid down their arms pending the elections, 
which are slated for the first Sunday in 


The Rise of American Civilization. By 
Charles A. Beard and Mai-y B. Beard. Two 
volumes. Macmillan, New York, 1927. 
Price, $12.50. 

Two thick, heavy volumes and a subject 
broad as our continent itself need not dis- 
hearten any ordinary reader interested in his 
country's growth. These books are attrac- 
tive from every point of view. They are 
written with a modern historical sense of 
balance, in language warm, imaginative, and 
bold, infused throughout with the intent to 
be impartial; also with a saving, not to say 
an acid, sense of humor. As far as one can 
judge from phraseology, the book was actu- 
ally written by one only of the two authors. 

Professor Beard, long a historian of note, 
has in this work undertaken to trace the 
whole course of civilization in the United 
States. In this he has been fortunate in the 
co-operation of his wife, whose special ex- 
perience lies along the lines of the suffrage 
and labor movements. Beginning with early 
colonizing and following development through 
the agricultural era — in fact, all the way 
down to the present moment — economic prin- 
ciples furnish the basis of classification and 

Probably no other American historian has 
managed to chronicle the Revolutionary War 
and, for that matter, the Civil War, too, with 
scarcely a reference to military events. These, 
apparently, seem to Professor and Mrs. 
Beard quite subsidiary to the great currents 
which produced, fiowed through, and swept 
out of those wars. One receives the im- 
pression, especially from the narrative of 
Civil War times, that what really moved 
things was less political theories and social 
ideals than economic and geographical 
causes. This is not to say that political, 
social, and even artistic movements are omit- 
ted from the story. On the contrary, these 
are carefully traced in each phase of de- 
velopment, but grouped on the economic 

The independent status of woman in this 
pioneer land and her subsequent rise to recog- 
nized civic importance is well pictured. In 
the realms of business, invention, art, litera- 
ture, even humor and caricature, lavish inci- 
dent and biographical illustration vivify the 
story. Nor are the great reform movements 
of the nineteenth century neglected; labor 
organization, missions, social work, and other 
lines of attempt to ameliorate the hardships 
of humanity are recognized. 

It is in the field of the Peace Movement 
where one finds the least sureness of touch, 
the most meager of r4sum4s. This fact is 
perhaps explainable because no complete nar- 
rative of the American peace movement has 
yet been published. Such a history, now in 
preparation, will probably soon be accessible 
to students. Yet many historians know that 
the peace movement did not "spring up" in 
1906, with the organization of the (second) 
New York Peace Society. Historians familiar 
with biographies of William Ladd, of Maine ; 
of Anson G. Phelps, the Dodges and Freling- 
huysens, of New York; of Channing, Emer- 
son, Samuel May, Noah and Joseph Worces- 




ter, and others, of Massachusetts; of Elihu 
Burritt, Ellsworth, and Gallaudet, of Con- 
necticut ; of Governor Oilman, of New Hamp- 
shire; of Presidents Wayland of Brown, 
Allen of Bowdoin, Lord of Dartmouth, Hitch- 
cock of Amherst, Walker of Harvard, Nott 
of Union College, Malcolm of Lewisburg, 
Allen of Gerard, and other prominent men 
of those years, must be aware of the fact 
that a lusty peace movement was well out of 
its cradle early in the nineteenth century. 
For all those years the Beards merely men- 
tion that the American Peace Society had 
been organized nearly one hundred years 
previous to 1912, when it moved from Boston 
to Washington. 

Whether intentional or not, there is a 
whiff of grim humor lurking in the facts 
which the Beards chose to tell of the works 
of the League to Enforce Peace just before 
the World War. The essential peacefulness 
of the German Kaiser and all his cohorts, as 
vouched for by Dr. Nicholas MuiTay Butler 
and others, right up to 1914 has its tragi- 
cally comic side, viewed from this end of the 
war. The main thing about the peace move- 
ment, as recognized in this work, is that it 
was really significant in America by 1914. 

The inaccuracies, as far as we can discover, 
are surprisingly few in the volumes, how- 
ever. We find the books stimulating reading 
for one who is willing to see both the faults 
and the greatness of his coiintry's civiliza- 
tion. The work is, too, a revelation in the 
new manner of lighting history. High-lights 
fall, not primarily upon generals, politicians, 
nor altogether upon statesmen. The spot- 
light centers, rather, upon natural groups, in- 
cluding outstanding representatives of each; 
it focuses upon the river-like rush, often 
turbulent, of human events, as determined 
by the unique conditions in this American 
continent and blended race. 

The Pboblkms of Peiace. Lectures delivered 
at Geneva Institute of International Rela- 
tions. Pp. SGT). Oxford University Press, 

Some seventeen lectures by men who are 
world authorities in their several fields are 
here published together. The lectures were 
delivered in the summer of 1926, at the 
Geneva Institute of International Relations. 

This is the first publication of the Institute 
and covers a field considerably enlarged since 
the first summer school at Geneva, which 
studied only the workings and constitution of 
the League of Nations. The first three sec- 
tions of this book take up the structure of 
the League and the labor organizations, their 
accomplishments and relation to the world 
of today. Then follows a section containing 
three lectures by Dr. James Brown Scott on 
judicial settlement of international disputes 
and one on non-official organizations. In both 
these fields Dr. Scott gives much credit to 
the American Peace Society and some of its 
able officers in the early years for work al- 
ready done toward justice and arbitration. 

A lecture by Dr. Garnet, Secretary of the 
League of Nations Union, discusses the psy- 
chology of patriotism and explains the part 
to be played by the League of Nations Asso- 
ciation in moving public opinion through edu- 
cation on the work of the League. The re- 
mainder of the book contains appendix notes 
embodying whatever worth-while points were 
brought out in the discussions following the 

Such a volume is a fair substitute for at- 
tendance upon the lectures themselves. 

Documentary History of the Taona-Abica 
Dispute. By William Jefferson Dennis. 
Pp. 253 and index. University of Iowa 
Press, 1927. 

Touching the diplomatic prestige of the 
United States hardly less than the political 
and commercial welfare of Peru, Chile, and 
Bolivia, the Tacna-Arica question is of real 
interest to students of international affairs 
in this country. It is the Alsace-Lorraine of 
the new world. If, happily, some peaceful 
solution of the dispute can by any means be 
attained, the first requisite is an understand- 
ing of the problem. 

This brochure, offered in the University of 
Iowa studies in the Social Science Series, is 
a thorough and clear documentary history of 
the dispute up to General Lassiter's report, 
June, 1926. There are a few excellent, well- 
explained diagrams and maps and a good 
index. The brief historical introduction is 
admirably judicial in tone, informative, and 
easy to read. The whole is a valuable refer- 
ence book on the Tacna-Arica question. 




Thk Legacy of Wab: Peace. By Boris A. 
Bakhmeteff. Pp. 53. Houghton, Mifflin 
Co., Boston, 1927. Price, $2.00, 

The war-time ambassador of Russia to the 
United States delivered this address at Mil- 
ton Academy in June, 1927. It was given 
under the permanent foundation, which was 
established in that school in 1922, in memory 
of those alumni who gave their lives in the 
World War. The noble and appropriate pur- 
pose of the foundation is to provide lectures 
and informal conferences dealing with demo- 
cratic responsibilities and the opportunities 
for leadership in the new day. 

M. Bakhmateff, therefore, traces for his 
young auditors the contrasting conditions in 
Europe and the United States since the war. 
He especially contrasts the unfortunate col- 
lective "6tatism" in Russia, with individual- 
istic democracy in the United States. Since 
real peace is "a peaceful progress of life" 
internally, rather than mere absence of war, 
he finds greater political health in this coun- 
try. We have, he says, attained personality 
among the nations; we have little to fear 
from subversive doctrines. It remains for 
us to follow up the ideas already begun in 
the way of open diplomacy, patience, good 
will. In these lines America has already 
inaugurated, since the war, a democratic 
doctrine in international behavior which 
holds the seed of future equity and freedom 
for the world. 

Building Imtebnational Good "VfiisL. By 
various writers. Pp. 242. Macmillan Co., 
Nftw York, 1927. Price, $1.50. 

Here is a well printed, but amazingly in- 
adequate, book on its subject. It consists of 
a series of small articles on large topics. 
They are written by Jane Addams and Emily 
Balch jointly, by J. H. Scattergood, Denys P. 
Myers, and others. 

In its historical portions no credit is given 
to the first workers for peace in this country, 
except in one sentence in the Addams-Balch 
article. There William Ladd, mentioned in 
four words, is called, astonishingly, "of Con- 
necticut." Since he was born in New Hamp- 
shire, lived, in Maine, and, except for a year 
and a half, his peace activities were largely 
centered in either New York or Boston, it 
seems odd that the year and a half of his 
Icmg work which did center in Connecticut 

should have placed him there in the minds of 
these ladies. Of the other articles some are 
strongly pro-League, some non-resistant in 
tone, absolute in doctrine; many of them 
quite out of date. 

The book is put out by the officers and 
Executive Committee of the World Alliance 
for International Friendship Through the 
Churches. They claim it to be a "r6sum6 of 
the various constructive methods" which are 
now in use making toward universal peace. 
The book is, we must repeat, lamentably in- 
adequate to its purpose. 

Beotheb John : A Tale of the Fiest Fban- 
ciscANS. By Vida D. Scudder. Pp. 336. 
Little, Brown & Co., Boston, 1927. Price, 

Miss Scudder, Professor of English Litera- 
ture at Wellesley College, has felt, with 
many others, that the story of St. Francis 
and his early disciples has somewhat to teach 
the modem world. A close student of the 
thirteenth century, she sees something akin 
to our modern paradoxes in the "varying atti- 
tudes of Lady Poverty's friends to questions 
of property and war." The emphasis on joy 
is another point which the Franciscans of 
those days have in common with many in 
the modern world, though perhaps today we 
expect happiness to flow from Impossible 

The book is not quite a novel, yet it is an 
imaginative and dramatic narrative of the 
absorbing struggles which moved the two 
wings of the Franciscan order immediately 
after Francis' death. 

Brother John is a lovable and loving Eng- 
lish youth, who leaves his estates in England 
and becomes a sincere and humble Brother 
Minor, finally a "spiritual, or zealot," and 
dies in prison, singing. Other brothers are 
vivid and living — Brother Bernard, Brother 
Elias, Brother Thomas, Brother Giles, and 

The sunny Umbrian landscape, with its 
hills, rivers and sky, as also the heavy po- 
litical atmosphere of Rome, are represented 
in a way to be remembered. Withal, there is 
a sane recognition — Was it Brother John or 
the twentieth-century author? — that poverty, 
actual avoidance of responsibility, has its 
dangers. It may burden others unfairly. 
These are still, as they were then, questions, 
and the answer is not yet. 






Delaying the Execution 

Chttaf Tr^hum^ 


APRIL, 1928 

American Peace Society 

Its Beginnings 

At a meeting of the Maine Peace Society at Minot, Febru- 
ary 10, 1826, a motion was carried to form a national peace 
society. Minot was the home of William Ladd. The first 
constitution for a national peace society was drawn by this 
illustrious man, at the time corresponding secretary of the 
Massachusetts Peace Society. The constitution was pro- 
visionally adopted, with alterations, February 18. 1828; but 
the society was finally and officially organized, through the 
influence of Mr. Ladd and with the aid of David Low Dodge, 
in New York City, May 8, 1828. Mr. Dodge wrote, in the 
minutes of the New York Peace Society: "The New York 
Peace Society resolved to be merged in the American Peace 
Society . . . which, in fact, was a dissolution of the old 
New York Peace Society, formed 16 August, 1815, and the 
American, May, 1828, was substituted in its place." 

Its Purpose 

The purpose of the American Peace Society shall be to 
promote permanent international peace through justice; and 
to advance in every proper way the general use of concilia- 
tion, arbitration, judicial methods, and other peaceful means 
of avoiding and adjusting differences among nations, to the 
end that right shall rule might in a law-governed world. 

— Constitution of the 
American Peace Society 
Article 11. 




Aethue Dbeein Call, Editor 

Leo Pasvolsky, Associate Editor 

Published since 1834 by 


Founded 1828 from Societies some of which began In 1815. 

Suite 612-614 Colorado Building, Wasliington, D. C. 

(Cable address, "Ampax, Washington.") 


Sent free to all members of the American Peace Society. Separate subscription 
price, f3.00 a year. Single copies, 30 cents each. 

Entered as second-class matter. June 1, 1911, at the Post-OflSce at Washington, 
D. C, under the Act of July 16, 1894. Acceptance for mailing at special rate of postage 
provided for in Section 1103, Act of October 3, 1917 ; authorized August 10, 1918. 

It heing impracticable to express in these columns the divergent views of 
the thousands of members of the American Peace Society, full responsibility 
for the utterances of this magazine is assumed by the Editor. 


Publications of The Amebican Peace Society 195-196 


World Conference on International Justice — The Spirit of It — Other 
1928 Anniversaries — The Havana Conference — The Search for Se- 
curity — Ten Years of Czechoslovakia — Editorial Notes 197-209 


Minutes Twenty-fifth Annual Meeting American Group Interparlia- 
mentary Union — Great Britain and Egypt — Financial Situation in 
India — Italy and Austria — Franco-Spanish Agreement on Tangier — 
New Cabinet in Yugoslavia — Elections in Japan 210-237 

General Articles 

The War Prevention Policy of the United States 238 

By Frank P. Kellogg, Secretary of State 

American Contributions to Education for International Understanding 244 
By President Bayard Dodge, the American University at Beirut 

The Royce Plan of Insurance 248 

By S. J. McFarran 

International Documents 

The Rejected Draft Treaty Between Great Britain and Egypt 249 

News in Brief 252 

Book Reviews 254 

Vol. 90 April, 1928 No. 4 



Theodoee E. Bukton 


David Jatne Hill 

Jackson H. Ralston 

Secretary Treasurer 

Abthub Deebin Call Geobge W. White 

Business Manager 

Lacey C. Zapf 


Assistant Director, Bureau of Research, Chamber of Commerce of the United States 

Secretary, American Section, International Chamber of Commerce 


(Asterisk Indicates member of Executive Committee) 

•Theodore B. Bdrton, President. Congressman 
from Ohio. President, American Group, Interparlia- 
mentary Union. Member House Committee on Foreign 
Affairs. Member United States Debt Funding Com- 

Philip Marshall Brown, Professor of Interna- 
tional Law, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jer- 

•Arthur Deerin Call, Secretary, and Editor of 
the Advocate of Peace. Executive Secretary, Amer- 
ican Group, Interparliamentary Union. 

P. P. Claxton, Superintendent of Schools, Tulsa, 
Oklahoma. Formerly United States Commissioner of 

John M. Crawford, President, Parkersburg Rig & 
Reel Company, Parkersburg, West Virginia. For 
many years a Director of the Chamber of Commerce 
of the United States. 

TysoN S. Dines, Attorney of Denver, Colorado. 

John J. Esch, Chairman, Interstate Commerce 
Commission. Formerly Member of Congress from 

Harry A. Garfield, President, Williams College, 
Williamstown, Mass. United States Fuel Adminis- 
trator during World War. 

♦Thomas E. Green, Director, National Speakers' 
Bureau, American Red Cross. 

Dwight B. Heard, President, Dwight B. Heard 
Investment Company, I'hoenix, Arizona. Director, 
Chamber of Commerce of the United States. 

•David Jayne Hill, Washington, D. C. Formerly 
Assistant Secretary of State and Ambassador to 

Clarence H. Howard, President, Commonwealth 
Steel Company, St. Louis, Missouri. For many years 
a Director, Chamber of Commerce of the United States, 
and member of American Committee, International 
Chamber of Commerce. 

Charles L. Hyde, President, American Exchange 
Bank, Pierre, South Dakota. 

William Mather Lewis, President, Lafayette Col- 
lege, Easton, Pa. 

Felix M. McWhirter, President, Peoples State 
Bank, Indianapolis, Indiana. Director, Chamber of 
Commerce of the United States. 

E. T. Meredith, Des Moines, Iowa. Director, 
Chamber of Commerce of the United States. Member 
American Committee, International Chamber of Com- 
merce. Formerly Secretary of Agriculture. 

Frank W. Mondell, Washington, D. C. Formerly 
Congressman from Wyoming. 

♦Walter A. Morgan, D. D., Postor, New First Con- 
gregational Church, Chicago, Illinois. 

♦George M. Morris, Washington, D. C. Partner of 
the Chicago and New York law firm of Kix-Miller & 

♦Henry C. Morris, Attorney of Chicago and Wash- 
ington, D. C. Formerly United States Consul. 

Edwin P. Morrow, Member. United States Board 
of Mediation, Washington, D. C. Formerly Governor 
of Kentucky. 

John M. Parker, formerly Governor of Louisiana, 
St. Francisville, La. 

Reginald H. Parsons, President, Parsons Invest- 
ment Company, Seattle, Washington. Member Amer- 
ican Committee, International Chamber of Commerce, 
and for many years member of the National Foreign 
Trade Council. 

Jackson H. Ralston, Attorney, Palo Alto, Califor- 

Arthur Ramsay, Southern Pines, North Carolina. 
Founder, Fairmont Seminary, Washington, D. C. 

Hiram W. Rickbr, I'resldent, Poland Springs Com- 
pany, South Poland, Maine. 

♦Theodore Stanfield, Peace Advocate and Author, 
New York City. Formerly Executive Manager, Amer- 
ican Metal Company. 

♦Jay T. Stocking, D. D., Pastor, Pilgrim Congre- 
gational Church, St. Louis, Mo. 

Silas H. Strawn, Attorney of Chicago. Chairman 
of Board, Montgomery Ward Company. Director, In- 
ternational Chamber of Commerce. President, Amer- 
ican Bar Association. 

♦Henry W. Temple, Congressman from Pennsyl- 
vania. Member House Committee on Foreign Aflfairs. 

Robert E. Vinson, President, Western Reserve 
University, Cleveland, Ohio. 

William Way, D. D., Rector, Grace Episcopal 
Church, Charleston, South Carolina. President of the 
New England Society of Charleston. 

Oscar Wells, President, First National Bank, Bir- 
mingham, Alabama. Formerly President, American 
Bankers Association. Member American Committee, 
International Chamber of Commerce. 

Frank White, Treasurer of the United States, 
Washington, D. C. Formerly Governor of North 

♦George W. White, Treasurer. President, National 
Metropolitan Bank, Washington, D. C. Treasurer 
American Automobile Association. 

William Allen White, Proprietor and Editor, 
Emporia Daily and Weekly Gazette, Emporia, Kans, 


Elmer Ellsworth Brown, Chancellor, New York 

W. H. P. Faunce, President, Brown University. 

William P. Gest, President, Fidelity Trust Com- 
pany, Philadelphia, Pa. 

Charles Cheney Hyde, Hamilton Fish Professor 
of International Law and Diplomacy, Columbia Uni- 
versity. Formerly Solicitor for Department of State. 

George H. Judd, President, Judd & Detweiler, Inc., 
Washington, D. C. 

Blihu Root, Attorney, New York City. Formerly 
Secretary of State, and for many years President of 
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 

James Brown Scott, Secretary Carnegie Endow- 
ment for International Peace, Washington, D. C. 
President, Institute of International Law. 

Charles F. Thwing, President Emeritus, Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio. 


612-614 Colorado Building, Washington, D. C. 

The following pamphlets are available at the headquarters of the American Peace Society, the 
price quoted being for the cost of printing and postage only : 

ADVOCATE OF PEACE, Published Monthly Except September, $3.00 


Butler, Nicholas Murray : 

The International Mind 1912 $0.05 

Call, Arthur D. : 

Cumber and Entanglements 1917 

Carnegie, Andrew : 

A League of Peace 1905 

Christ of the Andes (illustrated), 7th 

edition 1914 

Franklin on War and Peace 

Gladden, Washington : 

Is War a Moral Necessity? 1915 

Morgan, Walter A. ; 

Great Preaching in England and 

America 1924 

Palace of Peace at The Hague (illus- 
trated) 1914 

Peace seals in six colors. Sheets of 12 

12 sheets 

Stanfleld, Theodore : 

The Divided States of Europe and 

The United States of America.. 1921 
Tolstoi. Count Leon : 

The Beginning of the End 1898 

Bush-Brown, H. K. 

A Temple to Liberty 1926 

Military Training for Schoolboys : 

Symposium from educators 1916 

Taft, Donald R. 

Historv Text Books as Provoca- 
tives of War 1925 

Walsh. Rev. Walter : 

Moral Damage of War to the School 

Child 1911 

Oordt, Bleuland v. : 

Children Building Peace Palace ; 
post-card (sepia) 

Cole, Evelyn Leeds : 

Hymn for Universal Peace. . 

Call, Arthur D. : 

Federal Convention, May-Septem- 
ber, 1787. Published 1922, re- 

James Madison, America's greatest 

constructive statesman 

The Will to End War. . . : 

Call. M. S. : 

History of Advocate of Peace .... 
Emerson, Ralph Waldo : 

"War." Address before the Ameri- 
can Pence Society in 1838. Re- 

Estournelle de Constant : 

The Limitation of Armaments (Re- 
port at Interparliamentary Union 

Meeting, London) 

Hocking. Wm. E. 

Imraanuel Kant and International 


Kant. Immanuel : 

Perpetual Peace. First published 
in 1795, republished in 




























Levermore, Charles H. : Published. 

Synopsis of Plans for International 

Organization 1919 

Penn, William : 

Peace of Europe. First published 

in 1693, republished in 1912 $0.10 

Scott, James Brown : 

The Development of Modern Di- 
plomacy 1921 

Trueblood. Benjamin F. : 

International Arbitration at the 

Opening of the 20th Century 

Trueblood, Lyra : 

18th of May, History of its Ob- 

Tryon, James L. : 

A Century of Anglo-American 

Peace 1914 

New England a Factor in the 

Peace Movement 1914 

Washington's Anti-Militarism 

Worcester, Noah : 

Solemn Review of the Custom of 
War. First published Christ- 
mas, 1814, republished in 1904 






Beals, Charles E. : 

Benjamin F. Trueblood, Prophet of 

Peace 1916 . 10 

Hemmenway, John : 

William Ladd, The Apostle of 

Peace 1891 . 10 

Staub, Albert W. : 

David Low Dodge, a Peace Pioneer 

and his Descendants 1927 .10 

Wehberg, Hans : 

James Brown Scott 1926 . 10 

Deforest, J. H. : 

Is Japan a Menace to the United 

States? 1908 .05 

Kawakami, Isamu : 

Disarmament, The Voice of the 

Japanese People 1921 .10 

Tolstoi, Count Leon : 

Letter on the Russo-Japanese War 1904 .10 

Call, Arthur D. : 

Three Facts in American Foreign 

Policy 1921 .05 

A Governed World 1921 .05 

Hughes. Charles E. : 

The Development of International 

Law 1925 . 10 

Ralston, Jackson H. : 

Should Any National Dispute Be 

Reserved from Arbitration 1928 .05 

Root. Elihu : 

"The Great War" and International 

Law 1921 .10 

Kee alfio Interparliamentary Union 
Scott, James Brown : 

Organization of International Jus- 
tice 1917 .10 

Government of Laws and not of 

Men 1926 .15 

Should There be a Third Hague 

Conference ? 1925 . 10 



Snow, Alpheus H. : Published. 

International Reorganization 1917 

Internntional Legislation and Ad- 
ministration 1917 

League of Nations According to 

American Idea . 1920 

Spears, Brig.-Gen. B. L. : 

Demilitarized Zones and European 

Security 1925' 

Stanfleld, Theodore : 

A Coercive League 1920 

Trueblood, Benj. P. : 

A Periodic Congress of Nations... 1907 
Tryon, James L. : 

The Hague Peace System In Opera- 
tion 1911 

Call, Arthur D. : 

The Interparliamentary Union 1923 

20th Conference, Vienna 1922 

21st Conference, Copenhagen 1923 

Tryon, James L. : 

The Interparliamentary Union and 
its work 1910 








Twenty-third Conference In the 
United States and Canada, in- 
cluding 1925 

Story of the conference 
Who's who of the conference 
Addresses by — 

Frank B. Kellogg, Secretary 

of State 
Senator William B. McKin- 
ley, President of the U. S. 

Eiihu Root, Codification of 

international law 
Theodore E. Burton, Codlfi- 

Ciition of international 

Senator Claude E. Swanson, 

The Pan American Union 
Farewells at Niagara Falls 
Resolutions adopted by the 


Call, Arthur D. : 

Our Country and World Peace. 


Johnson, Julia E. (Compiler) : 
1926 $1.25 Permanent Court of International 

Justice 1923 

Scott, James Brown : 

Peace Through Justice 1917 



Slightly shelf-worn books at reduced prices 

Balou, Adin : 

Christian Non-resistance. 278 
pages. First published 1846, and 

republished 1910 .50 

Crosby, Ernest : 

Garrison, the Non-resistant. 141 

pages 1905 .25 

IjE Fontnine, Henri : 

The Great Solution. 177 pages.. 1916 .70 

Lynch, Frederick : 

Through Europe on the Eve of 

War. 152 pages 1914 . 25 

Von Suttner, Berthe : 

Lay Down Your Arms (a novel), 

435 pages 1914 .50 

White, Andrew D. : 

The First Hague Conference. 123 

pages 1905 . 50 


5th Universal Peace Congress, Chi- 
cago 1893 . 50 

First National Arbitration and Peace 

Congress, New York 1907 . 50 

Second National Peace Congress, Chi- 
cago 1909 . 50 

Third American Peace Congress, Bal- 
timore 1911 . 50 

Fourth American Peace Congress, St. 

Louis 1913 .50 

Fifth American Peace Congress, San 

Francisco 1915 . 50 

Twenty-first Annual Conference on 
International Arbitration. Lake 
Mohonk 1915 . 30 



Please enroll me as a member, of the class checked. Thus, I understand, I shall 
receive a free subscription to The Advocate of Peace, the Society's monthly magazine. 


n Annual $5 a year 

n Sustaining 10 a year 

D Contributing 25 a year 

n Institutional 25 a year 

D Life, $100 in one payment. 

n Send me a bill. 
n I enclose $ 

Name _. 

(D Subscription, only, to Advocate of Peace, $3) 




April, 1928 




THE World Conference on Inter- 
national Justice to be held in con- 
nection with the celebration of the one 
hundredth anniversary of the American 
Peace Society, in Cleveland, Ohio, is 
arousing interest not only in this coun- 
try but abroad. It promises to be one 
of the most important nonpolitical con- 
ferences America has entertained. 

As announced by the Program Com- 
mittee, of which James Brown Scott is 
chairman, the program will consist of 
two parts : one the general assemblies, to 
be addressed by outstanding men and 
women; the other a series of six study 
commissions, to meet for discussion and 
final report upon six key problems of 
international life. 

The work of the week has been pro- 
visionally distributed as follows : 

Sunday, May 6, will be "Peace Sun- 
day.'" Pastors of all churches are invited 
to address their congregations that day 
upon some aspect of international peace. 

Monday, May 7, will be "Ohio Day." 
The first general assembly will be held 
in the ballroom of the Cleveland Hotel, 
at 10 o'clock. This meeting will be ad- 
dressed by the Governor of the State, the 
Mayor of Cleveland, the President of the 
American Peace Society, and others. At 
the meeting announcements will be made 
relative to the rules of the conference, 
registration, the organization and work of 
the committees, and the like. The various 
commissions will meet separately for 

luncheon at 12 :30 o'clock and organize 
their work for the succeeding four days. 
A second general assembly is scheduled 
for 4 o'clock in the Cleveland Auditorium. 
It is our hope that President Coolidge or 
some other representative of the Govern- 
ment will speak on that occasion. A 
third general assembly will be held in the 
evening at 8 o'clock. 

Tuesday, May 8, will be "American 
Peace Society Day" in honor of the fact 
that the American Peace Society was 
founded May 8, 1828. On this day the 
six commissions will meet separately from 
10 to 12. At 3 p. m. there will be the 
fourth general assembly, with an address 
upon the history of the American Peace 
Society; upon the work of its founder, 
William Ladd; and with addresses by 
representatives of various peace and pa- 
triotic organizations. The fifth general 
assembly will be held in the evening, at 
8 o'clock. 

Wednesday, May 9, will be "Neighbors 
Day" with particular emphasis upon our 
country's relations with Canada and 
Latin America. The Commissions will 
meet from 10 a. m. to 12 o'clock. At 
3 p. m. there will be a sixth general ses- 
sion to be addressed by representatives of 
Canada and Latin America. A seventh 
general session will be held in the evening, 
at 8 o'clock. 

Thursday, May 10, will be known as 
"World Day." The commissions wiU 
meet from 10 to 12. At 3 p. m. there 
will be the seventh general assembly, to 
be addressed by representatives of wom- 




en's organizations. At 8 o'clock there 
will be the sixth general assembly, to be 
addressed by diplomatic representatives of 
England, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, 
and other governments. 

Friday, May 11, will be "Report Day." 
At 10 o'clock the commissions will hold 
their final meetings. At 3 p. m. the 
chairmen of the six commissions will sub- 
mit their reports at the ninth general as- 
sembly for discussion and adoption. At 
8 o'clock the tenth and final general ses- 
sion will be held. 

The one hundredth annual meeting of 
the Board of Directors of the American 
Peace Society will be held at 10 a. m., 
Saturday, May 13, at the Hotel Cleve- 

The general assemblies and the com- 
missions of the World Conference, as far 
as seating capacity permits, will be open 
to every one without charge; but seats 
will be reserved for all delegates. 

The six commissions, each manned by 
specialists, will be open to all delegates, 
the official delegates having the right to 
the floor and to vote. Associate delegates 
may attend and, with the approval of the 
commissions, speak from the floor. 

The First Commission, on the Inter- 
national Implications of Industry — Hon. 
John M. Parker, former Governor of 
Louisiana, Chairman; Dr. Harold G. 
Moulton, Vice-Chairman ; Whiting Wil- 
liams, Secretary — will study and discuss 
major international activities of banks, 
trade organizations, chambers of com- 
merce, labor and other groups, in their 
relations to a better international under- 
standing and behavior. 

The Second Commission, on the Inter- 
national Implications of Justice — Prof. 
Philip Marshall Brown, Chairman — wiU 
deal with the contributions of inter- 
national law to the problems of inter- 
national peace. 

The Third Commission, on Methods of 
Organization for the Promotion of Inter- 
national Peace — President Ernest H. Wil- 
kins, of Oberlin College, Chairman — will 
be open to peace and patriotic groups in 
the interest of a better understanding be- 
tween them and a more effective co- 
operation for their common ends. 

The Fourth Commission, on the Inter- 
national Implications of Education — 
John J. Tigert, United States Commis- 
sioner of Education, Chairman — will be 
composed of representatives of schools and 

The Fifth Commission, on the Inter- 
national Implications of Eeligion — 
Bishop William Eraser McDowell, Chair- 
man, Eev. WiUiam W. Van Kirk, Secre- 
tary — will be open to the representatives 
of all creeds. 

The Sixth Commission, on the Inter- 
national Implications of Social Agen- 
cies — Dr. Edward T. Devine, Chairman — 
opens to the peace movement a new and 
important phase of world effort. 


T^O DESCEIBE with any adequacy the 
-*- spirit of the one hundredth anniver- 
sary celebration of the American Peace 
Society would require the technical ability 
of the historian, the trained insight of the 
philosopher, and the subtle power of the 
prophet. Furthermore, that spirit could 
be phrased with greater detachment and 
accuracy by one outside the Society. And 
yet we, responsible for the maintenance 
of the Society's traditions, appointed to 
carry on its work, are not unmindful of 
the Societ/s past, its present, or of the 
problems relating to its future. We 
know something of its spirit. 

Out of its one hundred years the Amer- 
ican Peace Society, anxious to avoid the 
weakness of complacency and the silliness 
of egotism, craves the friendly counsel of 
its fellows. 




For the kindly things already said it 
is very grateful. There is the City of 
Cleveland, gracious and energetic host of 
the Conference. There is the Eotary 
International, writing from its headquar- 
ters in Chicago, under date of February 
11 : "This will inform you that the 
Board designated President Sapp as its 
official representative at this Conference, 
with power to invite such other Eotarians 
to participate as he sees fit. The Board 
was of the opinion that numerous Eotari- 
ans would be glad to attend this Confer- 
ence. We will, therefore, give to all 
Eotary clubs information concerning your 
Conference and encourage all Eotarians 
to attend who may find it possible to do 

Under date of February 4, the regent 
of the Charter Oak Chapter of the Daugh- 
ters of American Colonists, Cleveland, 
Ohio, wrote: 

"The ancestors of the Daughters of the 
American Colonists were among those 
who during the historic colonial days had 
some worthy part in laying the foun- 
dations of our great Eepublic. 

"We surely must appreciate our heri- 
tage and should deem it a great privilege 
and our patriotic duty to join with the 
forces of those who are endeavoring to 
protect those foundations and build upon 
them a firm structure of national defense 
and good will, as sent forth in the plat- 
form and purpose of the American Peace 
Society, such as: To advance in every 
proper way the general use of arbitration ; 
to educate and crystallize public senti- 
ment an effective force, to the end that 
there may be better relations among na- 

"May we not be blinded by false propa- 
ganda, but know the truth that we are a 
part of the whole; therefore we should 
interest ourselves in the greater thought 
of what we as individuals and organized 
bodies can play to help promote inter- 
national peace through justice. 

"The Board of Governors of Charter 
Oak Chapter, Daughters of American 
Colonists, voted unanimously to send 
twenty-five dollars as a gift to the 

American Peace Society, this amount to 
be applied as an institutional membership 
as long as they can see their way clear to 
pay this amount, provided the National 
Society, D. A. C, grant us the privilege 
of joining the American Peace Society." 

This letter was signed by Mrs. Emma 
S. Mead, Eegent, and Mrs. Sarah L. 
Blong, Corresponding Secretary. 

Under the date of February 6, at a 
regular meeting of the Municipal Council, 
United Spanish War Veterans, held in 
the Old Courthouse, Cleveland, the follow- 
ing resolution was presented by Walter 
K. Patterson and approved: 

"Whereas the American Peace Associa- 
ation will hold its one-hundredth anni- 
versary meeting in Cleveland, Ohio, on 
May 7 to May 11, 1938, this meeting to 
be known as a 'World Conference on 
International Justice;' and 

"Whereas the United Spanish War 
Veterans heartily endorse the purpose and 
aims of the aforesaid Association; and 

"Whereas said Association includes in 
its membership many leaders in govern- 
mental, educational, and business activi- 
ties of this and foreign countries; be it 

"Eesolved, that as evidence of our ap- 
proval and support of the policies and 
aims of the American Peace Society we, 
the Municipal Council of the United 
Spanish War Veterans of Cleveland, Ohio, 
instruct our secretary to forward to the 
proper official of said Society a copy of 
this resolution, and with it the assurance 
of our co-operation with the members of 
said Association in their efforts to pro- 
mote peace and good will among nations." 

Another evidence of the good will is 
the record of institutional members shown 
upon the books of the Society. This type 
of membership, with its fee of twenty-five 
dollars, is growing more rapidly than ever 
before. They are coming not only from 
peace and patriotic organizations, but 
from women's clubs, churches, college 
clubs, Eotary clubs, the Women's Over- 
seas Service Legion, Councils of Jewish 
Women, chambers of commerce. 




In the presence of all this interest and 
support, it is difficult for the American 
Peace Society to express itself. In his 
"Essay on Old Age," Cicero remarks: 
"They advance no argument who say that 
old age is not engaged in active duty; 
they rather resemble those who would say 
that the pilot of a ship is unemployed be- 
cause, while some are climbing the mast, 
others running up and down the decks, 
others emptying the bilge water, he, hold- 
ing the helm, sits at the stern at his ease. 
He does not do those things that the 
young men do, but in truth he does much 
greater and better things." 

The peace movement is filled with 
many men of many minds. Some seem 
to be climbing the mast, others to be run- 
ning up and down the deck, others to be 
emptying the bilge water, some to be 
jumping overboard. These things have 
been true of members of the American 
Peace Society from time to time. Most of 
such activities are necessary to keep the 
ship going. Just now, however, mindful 
of the experience of one hundred years, 
the American Peace Society is not sitting 
at the stern at its ease. It may not be 
holding the helm; it is peculiarly inter- 
ested, however, to get at that helm. That 
is its spirit. It dares to believe that the 
Cleveland Conference will help to reveal 
the helm and to clarify the course. 

In celebrating one's hundredth anni- 
versary it is possible to lose perspective. 
Emerson wrote in his Journal: 

"Sad spectacle that man should live 
and be fed that he may fill a paragraph 
every year in the newspapers for his won- 
derful age, as we record the weight and 
girth of the big ox or mammoth girl. We 
do not count a man's years until he has 
nothing else to count." 

But when Emerson wrote that he was 
only thirty-seven years of age. When he 

was forty-four he entered in his Journal 
the following: 

"The world wears well. These autumn 
afternoons and well-marbled landscapes 
of green and gold and russet, and steel- 
blue river, and smoke-blue New Hamp- 
shire mountains are and remain as bright 
and perfect penciling as ever." 

Again, when he was fifty-eight he 
entered these words: 

"I reached the other day the end of 
my fifty-seventh year and am easier in my 
mind than hitherto. I could never give 
much reality to evil and pain. But now 
when my wife says, 'Perhaps this tumor 
on your shoulder is a cancer,' I say, 'What 
if it is.' ''' 

Some days later : 

"One capital advantage of old age is 
the absolute insignificance of a success, 
more or less. I went to town and read a 
lecture yesterday. Thirty years ago it 
had really been a matter of importance 
to me whether it was good and effective. 
Now it is of none in relation to me. It is 
long already fixed what I can and what 
I cannot do." 

Somewhere near Christmas, the next 

"I ought to have added to my list of 
benefits of age the general views of life 
we get at sixty, when we penetrate show 
and look at facts." 

And, finally, when sixty-seven, he ob- 
served again : 

"My new book sells faster, it appears, 
than either of its foregoers. This is not 
for its merit, but only shows that old age 
is a good advertisement. Your name has 
been seen so often that your book must 
be worth buying." 

Going back to Cicero, who has written 
with so much wisdom and detachment 
upon the subject of old age, the American 
Peace Society may be comforted by these 
words: "The intellectual powers remain 
in the old, provided study and application 
be kept up." 




Writers on education have or did have a 
learned way of saying that "phylogeny 
repeats ontogeny/' by which they mean 
that during the processes of growth a 
race or group repeats the processes of de- 
velopment peculiar to the individual. As 
the American Peace Society views the 
earnest efforts of some of its fellow- 
workers in the cause of international 
peace, it sees them repeating experiences 
through which the American Peace So- 
ciety has passed with no little travail. It 
therefore finds itself thinking at times 
that much of the tense effort of the day 
is but a repetition of what the American 
Peace Society did long ago and found 
abortive. But for the labors of its co- 
workers it has nothing but kindliest feel- 
ings. All the friendly gestures and gentle 
words cheer us up and hearten the So- 
ciety as it looks out across another cen- 
tury about to open. 

The Cleveland Conference will be a 
get-together conference. There will be 
no restrictions placed upon the utterances 
of the delegates. As great men were able 
to state principles and forecast qualities 
which have endured for a century, it is 
hoped that those principles and policies 
will come out of the World Conference on 
International Justice in Cleveland en- 
larged and improved. 


AS THE American Peace Society 
-^^ plans the celebration of its one hun- 
dredth anniversary, it is fitting to recall 
that the year 1928 marks other "high 
tides in the calendar." 

Sir William Randal Cremer, founder of 
the Interparliamentary Union, was born 
in Fareham, Hampshire, England, March 
18, 1828. The passion of his life was to 
do something toward the ultimate aboli- 
tion of war. He conceived that the hope 
for such a thing lies in international arbi- 
tration. In 1871 he conceived a plan for 

a High Court of Nations which was 
adopted by the Council of the Inter- 
national Arbitration League, of which he 
was also the founder. Because of his 
work in organizing the Interparliament- 
ary Union, he received the Nobel Peace 

The French novelist and author of 
scientific romances, Jules Verne, was 
born in Nantes, France, February 8, 1828. 
His imaginary trips in the air, around the 
world and under the sea are still the de- 
light of old and young. 

Franz Joseph Gall, founder of phrenol- 
ogy, a reaUy distinguished scientist, died 
in 1828, and, a hundred years before, 
London's first auctioneer, one Samuel 
Patterson, was born. 

P. W. Wilson, writer for the New 
York Times' magazine, has been looking 
into this year 1928. He finds that H. G. 
Wells is not the man who outlined his- 
tory; that history outlining began in Ire- 
land with Marianum Scolius, author of 
the "Chronicon Universale," which in- 
cluded everything from Creation to the 
date of this history. This Benedictine 
monk was born in 1028, 

It is of interest to be reminded that 
Chaucer, father of English literature, 
was probably born in 1328; that Bunyan, 
the author of "Pilgrim's Progress," the 
most perfect English to be found any- 
where outside the Bible, was bom in 1628; 
that Goldsmith, author of the "Deserted 
Village" and of "She Stoops to Con- 
quer," was born in 1728; that George 
Meredith was born in 1828, and that 
Thomas Hardy died in 1828; that both 
Tolstoi, master interpreter of the human 
spirit, and Nikolai Tchernyshevsky, 
founder of Nihilism, were born in 1828, 
and that Henrik Ibsen, Norwegian dra- 
matic poet and moralist, was born at 
Skien, March 20, 1828. 

We are under obligations to Mr. P. W. 
Wilson for reminding us, further, that 




Elizabeth Charles, whose family displayed 
the deeper pieties of a Lutheran home, 
and that Samuel Jackson Eandall, au- 
thor of "Maryland, My Maryland" were 
born just one hundred years ago. John 
S. Earey of Ohio, astonished England 
with his ability to tame a horse within 
an hour. He was born in 1828. Luke 
Hansard, who fooled himself into believ- 
ing that if the debates in Parliament were 
reported someone would take the trouble 
to read them, died in 1828. 

The author who has done us the serv- 
ice of lining up the "Class of '28" writes 
with such charm that we are glad here 
to repeat some of his own words. He 
writes : 

"So, as Homer would say when enumer- 
ating his heroes, we have philosophers 
like Henri Taine, the Frenchman, and 
Friedrich Albert Lange, the German; 
novelists like George W. Thornbury; an 
expert on Eussia like William Ealston 
Shedden Ealston; the historian, Pierre 
Lanfrey, who was too republican to praise 
Napoleon, and Victor Eydberg, the 
Swede — all born in 1828 and all a worry 
to anybody who has to write or read these 

"In the grim realm of theology the 
class of '28 has borne a strenuous part. 
Four hundred years ago Patrick Hamil- 
ton, protomartyr of Scottish Presby- 
terianism, was tried before Archbishop 
Beaton and burned alive. Two hundred 
years ago Cotton Mather, whose eloquence 
stimulated the witch hunts of Massachus- 
setts, died a more peaceful death than his 
victims. One hundred years ago Charles 
Voysey, the Theist, was born — he whose 
distaste for eternal punishment caused 
such heartsearchings in the Church of 
England that he had to leave it. 

"Not that all ecclesiastics are thus 
storm-tossed. John Parkhurst, born 
1728, did no more than produce ^A 
Hebrew and English Lexicon Without 

Points,' for which he was neither incin- 
erated nor excommunicated. Bishop 
Lightfoot followed a hundred years later, 
with the German theologian, Abraham 
Kuenan, whose reconstruction of the Old 
Testament was in part translated by that 
early modernist. Bishop Colenso, who 
gave his name to a town and, incidentally, 
to a battle in Natal; who wrote about 
algebra, and was one of the first men to 
split the Church of England. 

"Of the arts the earliest is architecture, 
and the year 628 graduated that great 
Anglo-Saxon churchman, Benedict Bis- 
cop, who introduced stone edifices and 
glass into England, whence these com- 
forts were brought in due course to Amer- 
ica. Witness the skyline of Broadway, 
which should be set to his account. 

"The architect and sculptor Desiderio 
da Settignano, who designed the famous 
tomb of Carlo Marsuppuni in Santa 
Croce, before which the tourist to Flor- 
ence pauses for three seconds at least by 
the guide's stopwatch, was born, greatly 
to his credit, in 1428. Eobert Adam, the 
architect of Adelphi Terrace, where Ber- 
nard Shaw and Joseph Pennell once were 
neighbors, saw the light of day in 1728. 
In 1828— or was it 1827?— there died 
William Thornton, an architect of the 
Capitol, Washington, D. C, while three 
successors of his were born that year — 
Eichard Morris Hunt, who designed 
houses for the Vanderbilts; Henry Hob- 
son Eichardson, who achieved a dim reli- 
gious light in the Eomanesque Trinity 
Church, Boston, and Eichard M. Upjohn, 
who, following the measurements of late 
Gothic, reproduced it in Trinity Church, 
Wall Street. 

"In the Class of Twenty-eight the 
artists are an illustrious group. To 
Albert Diirer, who died in 1528, a man 
bred in the strict honesties of the gold- 
smith's trade, painting and engraving 
were a guild, serving society with serious 




and careful pictures. To be 'a pure and 
skillful man' — that, as he said of his 
father, was his ideal, and Diirer's art, ten- 
der if angular, was consecrated to 'an 
honorable Christian life.' 

"^England's successor to Diirer was 
Thomas Bewick, who, dying in 1828, had 
been an engraver of painstaking exacti- 
tude. He desired no beauty beyond the 
plumage of birds and the glory of beasts 
and flowers, which he studied with a 
Japanese reverence. 

"Diirer's death synchronized with the 
birth of the magnificent genius — mag- 
nificent is the exact word for it — of Paul 
Veronese. To him art was no handmaid 
of faith. It was rather that faith had 
become the handmaid of art. He is much 
less interested in Mary of Nazareth than 
he is in the marble halls which he depicts 
as her mansion. In his 'Marriage at Cana 
of Galilee,'' which may be described as a 
gorgeous anticipation of David Wark 
Griffith, it is not easy, save by an identify- 
ing halo, to discover the central figure. 
Paul Veronese practiced his art at a mom- 
ent when art was leaving religion behind 
and entering fashionable society. 

"Of Baroccio, also born in 1528, we 
are told that when he was decorating the 
Vatican jealous rivals tried to poison him. 
At a centenary, however, we must let by- 
gones be bygones. Enough that in Baroc- 
cio we see the effects of light and shade 
achieved no longer with painful experi- 
ment but with a conscious mastery which 
had not yet become the fated facility of 
his successors. 

"It was a free, pleasure-loving art — 
painting, caricature, it mattered not what 
— that Goya, the warm-blooded Spaniard, 
dying in 1828, shared with the Bouchers 
and the Troyons of France; an irresis- 
tible virtuosity, unhampered by restraints. 

"In 1828 died Gilbert Stuart, fairly 
to be described as the founder of painting 
in the United States. Born in Ehode 
Island, he studied in England and, after 

achieving success in London, opened his 
studio in Kew York and Philadelphia. 
What he did was not to create a school 
of painting, but to import one. Whistler 
and Sargent returned the compliment. 
It is perhaps strange that an artist who 
had painted a portrait of King George III 
should proceed to record and indeed to 
syndicate the countenance of Washington. 
The Class of Twenty-eight should not, 
however, be judged in this matter too 
harshly. It includes not Stuart alone 
but also Margaret Nicholson, the seam- 
stress, who tried to stab King George III. 
She died, 1828, in Bedlam, and Shelley 
put out a volume of poems which he de- 
scribed as her posthumous fragments. 

"The year 1828 did its duty, indeed, to 
art. It saw the birth of Johannes Schil- 
ling, the sculptor, whose vast materpiece, 
the Niederwald Monument of Germania, 
opposite Bingen-on-the-Ehine, marked the 
triumph over France in 1870. 

As to lady members, Twenty Eight is 
not too strong. Still there are evidences 
of coeducation. Jeanne d'Albret, born in 
1528 to become the mother of King Henry 
of Navarre, was a poetess and a Hugue- 
not of distinguished mind. Of less emi- 
nence in virtue was Lady Caroline Lamb, 
wife of the Prime Minister Melbourne, 
who preferred to be the friend of Byron. 
She died a hundred years ago, and two 
hundred years ago died Hester Johnson, 
Swift's Stella and his good angel. The 
noblest of the women to be celebrated this 
year is Josephine Butler, the heroic cham- 
pion of her sex against the laws of shame. 
Her cause is today central in the League 
of Nations. 

"The Class of Twenty-eight includes a 
reasonably adequate orchestra and choir. 
We may select Niccolo Piccini, rival of 
Gliick, and Johann Adam Hiller, with his 
operettas, who, born in 1728, deserves a 
brief recall. But the encore must be re- 
served wholly for Franz Schubert, who, 
dying in 1828, when he was little over 30, 




had composed 500 songs, ten symphonies, 
six masses, with sonatas, quartets and 
other details, yet had lived in penury. 
Though prolific, Schubert produced mel- 
ody harmony that revealed a singular 
charm, as of a man who enjoys the happi- 
ness of others which he may not share. 
Prizes are offered this year for the best 
ending to his 'Unfinished Symphony,' and 
there are some who expect a competition 
for completion of Venus of Milo to follow. 

"It must not be supposed that the 
Class of Twenty-eight studied life wholly 
on the campus of civilization. In 1728 a 
boy was born in a cottage who proceeded 
to employment as a haberdasher. James 
Cook then went to sea and assumed the 
serious responsibility of charting the 
coasts of Australia and New Zealand, 
which have never been the same since. 
No man added as much as did he to our 
knowledge of the Southern Ocean, and if 
he was slain on Hawaii it was merely be- 
cause the natives had adopted their own 
Monroe doctrine. Contemporary with 
Captain Cook was Hyder-Ali, the advocate 
of a Monroe doctrine for India, who gave 
the British a run for their money. 

"The Class is not crowded with states- 
men. Still, there are a few that amuse. 
In 1228 died Stephen Langton, the 
Archbishop who acted as amanuensis for 
the Barons when, unready with the quill, 
they made their mark on Magna Charta. 
The Duke of Buckingham, too, courtier to 
King Charles I, was stabbed in 1628 by 
the somewhat too impulsive Felton, who 
should have waited for Cromwell's axe. 
A hundred years ago died Lord Liverpool, 
the permanent Prime Minister of his 

"In the Class of Twenty-eight we see, 
finally, the march of science, invading the 
realms of the unknown. Born in 1628, 
Marcello Malpighi, as physician to Pope 
Innocent XII, peered through his prim- 
itive microscope at the structure of ani- 

mals and flowers, A century later there 
appeared Joseph Black, a Scottish-Irish- 
man born at Bordeaux, who pondered over 
the mysteries of latent heat. Contem- 
porary with him was Johann Heinrich 
Lambert, the mathematician, who meas- 
ured the intensity of light. Thunberg, 
the Swedish botanist, whose travels in- 
cluded Java and Japan, died in 1828." 

By taking a biographical dictionary 
doubtless one could dig out other illustri- 
ous events or persons whose anniversaries 
might be celebrated this year. As final 
examples, John Hunter, noted British 
surgeon, now buried in Westminster 
Abbey, was born in 1728. Andrew Jack- 
son was elected President of the United 
States in 1828. 

While we celebrate in 1928 the birth of 
the American Peace Society in 1828, 
there is a certain pleasure in recalling 
these other and interesting coincident an- 


WE FIND it difficult to understand 
the criticisms of the Sixth Pan- 
American Conference, held at Havana 
Conference, January 16 to February 20. 
We cannot believe that the work of that 
conference is to mean greater embarrass- 
ment for our United States. 

It is undoubtedly true that the Pan 
American Union, as a result of that con- 
ference, is more definitely and more se- 
curely fixed than before the conference. 
The action which made this a fact was 
unanimous. All Latin American coun- 
tries are now in position to choose as their 
representative upon the governing board 
men other than diplomatic representa- 
tives. It has been decided that the Pan 
American Union will not exercise func- 
tions of a political character. From now 
on instruments of ratification of the 
treaties and other diplomatic instruments 
signed at the international conferences of 




American States are to be deposited at 
the Pan American Union, which will com- 
municate notice of the receipt of such 
ratification to other States. There are to 
be closer relations between the Pan Amer- 
ican Union and other official Pan Amer- 
ican organizations. New duties have been 
imposed upon the Union, relating to the 
calling of conferences, to educational 
and social problems, special investiga- 

These are not unimportant matters. 
From now on the Pan American Union 
will have intimate relations with the Con- 
gress of Journalists, commercial confer- 
ences, with labors connected with bibli- 
ographies, with pedagogy, plant and 
animal sanitary control, trade-marks, 
steamship lines and port formalities, 
agricultural co-operation. Red Cross 
work, geography, and history. The con- 
ference adopted a resolution relative to 
the creation of an inter-American insti- 
tute of intellectual co-operation. The 
Pan American Union has been organ- 
ized to formulate the bases of a proj- 
ect for such an institute. The work 
spreads out over the interchange of stu- 
dents and professors, the publication of 
commercial statistics, the use of interna- 
tional rivers, the construction of a longi- 
tudinal highway, a standard coin for all 
the American republics, migration be- 
tween States, and the codification of inter- 
national law. It seems to have been over- 
looked by our press that the Pan Amer- 
ican Union was requested to co-operate in 
the preparatory work of the codification 
of international law and the studies that 
may be undertaken relative to uniformity 
and legislation. At the same time, the 
project formulated by the permanent 
Committee on International Law, estab- 
lished at Rio de Janeiro, those prepared 
by the Committee on Private Interna- 
tional Law, established at Montevideo, 
and the studies undertaken by the Com- 

mittee on Comparative Legislation and 
Uniformity of Legislation at Havana, are 
to be transmitted to the Pan American 
Union, which in turn shall forward them 
for the scientific examination of the Ex- 
ecutive Committee of the American Insti- 
tute of International Law. 

This is all constructive business, calcu- 
lated, we believe, to promote acquaintance 
and a better feeling between the peoples 
of the Western Hemisphre. 


THE search for security as a prelimi- 
nary to any international peace in 
Europe continues unabated. It is a major 
issue in the League of Nations Assembly; 
in the Disarmament Commission now in 
session; and in the Arbitration and Se- 
curity Commission, set up by the League's 
Preparatory Commission on Disarma- 
ment upon the request of the last assem- 
bly of th'b League, which committee has 
been in session in Geneva since February 
10. The work of the Security Commis- 
sion in behalf of a general security pact, 
has been classified under three headings: 
Arbitration Agreements, Security Agree- 
ments, and Articles of the Covenant of 
the League of Nations. A considerable 
body of material has been brought to- 
gether by these three subcommittees in 
the nature of memoranda. 

The memorandum on arbitration and 
conciliation calls attention to the facili- 
ties offered by the Council of the League, 
to the possibilities set forth in the various 
types of arbitration and conciliation 
treaties, and to conciliation as a method 
of settlement. It divides the different 
types of treaties into three kinds: those 
providing for the arbitration of all dis- 
putes, either by the courts at The Hague 
or by commissions of conciliation; those 
providing for certain classes of disputes, 
either by the courts at The Hague or by 
committees of arbitration; and, finally, 




treaties providing for the submission of 
all disputes to conciliation commissions or 
at last to the Council of the League. 

In other words, from the point of view 
of the issues involved and the method of 
settlement, there is a type of security 
treaty represented by the thirty treaties 
already registered with the League; there 
is the type represented by the Locarno 
pacts, and there is a type represented by 
the treaties between Switzerland and 
Scandinavian powers. Under the first, 
it is provided that all disputes shall be 
arbitrated, and in the case of non- 
justiciable disputes, conciliation is usually 
compulsory. Under the second type 
provision is also made for the arbitra- 
tion of justiciable and the conciliation 
of other disputes; but if conciliation 
is impossible, there remains the settle- 
ment by judicial decree quite in accord 
with Article 36 of the Statute of the 
Permanent Court of International Jus- 
tice. The third type includes treaties 
which provide for reservations relating to 
vital interests, territorial status, internal 
problems, or existing situations. 

The Committee on Security Questions 
finds it impossible to contemplate the 
conclusion of a general security agreement 
supplementing the obligations assumed 
under the Covenant. This committee 
holds that wider guarantees of security 
must mean separate non-aggression 
agreements, or compacts of arbitration or 
mutual assistance, which it assumes to be 
the highest possible type of security 
agreement. Such pacts must necessarily 
include the prohibition of force, pacific 
procedures for the settlement of all dis- 
putes, and a system of mutual assistance 
in harmony with the Council of the 
League. This commission calls attention 
further to the possibilities of demili- 
tarized zones, the definition of an aggres- 
sor, the extension of the Lorcano Pact, the 
refusal to aid an aggressor, and to the 

necessity of disarming as the organization 
of security permits, the guarantee by a 
third State, and other matters. 

The committee dealing with the Cove- 
nant frowns upon extending any code of 
procedure for the League in times of 
emergency. The League exists to pre- 
vent war, and can apply repressive meas- 
ures only in extreme cases. It fears at- 
tempts to define such words as "aggres- 
sion" and "resort to war," as they might 
mean action by the League at a time when 
action might be undesirable. It believes 
that the preparation of the military sanc- 
tion provided for in Article XVI does not 
seem likely to promote mutual confidence, 
except accompanied by the organization 
of pacific procedure and unless there is 
also a general agreement on the reduction 
and limitation of armaments. It agrees 
that the Council should be able to declare 
whether or not a breach of the Covenant 
has taken place, and to point to the party 
which has broken the Covenant. The 
committee seems to regard with some 
favor the possibilities of applying meas- 
ures of economic pressure, but craves the 
consultation of economic and financial 

Thus again it is clear the problem of 
attaining security is a difficult matter. 

It may be possible to extend the Lo- 
carno system, to increase bilateral agree- 
ments, to submit more justiciable dis- 
putes to the World Court, and to conclude 
agreements for setting up more concili- 
ation commissions. Great Britain seems 
to favor these things; but they are all 
somewhat less hopeful when we recall that 
Great Britain stiU refuses to sign the 
optional clause of the statute of the Per- 
manent Court of International Justice. 
The German position that war cannot 
be prevented by preparing to wage war 
against war is more in accord with our 
American view. The hope of security is 
to organize a world for protection against 
the outbreak of war. Nations must be 




able to achieve their interests without re- 
sort to arms. It is the task of statesmen 
to show the way. 

This is what the Secretary of State of 
the United States and M. Briand are try- 
ing to do. In the treaty signed by Mr. 
Olds and M. Claudel, February 6, there 
is no mention of a military alliance, of 
plans for the coercion of States, of defi- 
nitions, of guarantees. There is the rec- 
ognition of diplomatic procedure, of ju- 
dicial processes, and of investigation and 
report. That is all. In our opinion, this 
approach to the problem of security is 
wiser and more hopeful in overcoming 
war as an instrument of national policy 
and as a means of promoting the interests 
of security between States than all the at- 
tempts to achieve such by the threat of 


CZECHOSLOVAKIA celebrates this 
year its first decennary. During 
these eventful ten years perhaps the most 
important achievement, next to the for- 
mation of the republic itself, is the man- 
ner with which the nearly nine million 
Czechoslovaks, the more than three mil- 
lion Germans, the little less than a million 
Magyars, the half million Euthenians, the 
nearly one hundred thousand Poles, the 
nearly two hundred thousand Jews, have 
been brought together in a working unity. 
This population of over fourteen mil- 
lion is spread over Bohemia with approxi- 
mately 333 persons per square mile, Mo- 
ravia with 309, Silesia with about 394, 
Slovakia with 159, and Buthenia with 
124, representing a density of population 
of over 251 persons per square mile as 
against our thirty-five in the United 
States. Over ten millions of the popula- 
tion are Catholic, nearly a million Protes- 
tant, the rest representing various faiths 
or no religion at all. 

The difficulties facing the organization 
of this new and interesting republic 
readily appear as one studies the schools. 
There are nearly fourteen thousand ele- 
mentary schools, &Q per cent of which are 
Czechoslovaks, 231^ per cent German, 
3.4 per cent Euthenians, 5.8 per cent 
Magyar, and the rest Polish or miscel- 
laneous schools. These differences, with 
slight variations, are found in the higher 
grade schools. 

JSTo country is of greater interest to the 
social scientists than Czechoslovakia. 
There is Prague, sometime called the 
"City of the Hundred Spires,'^ sometime 
the "Eome of the North," with her many 
signs of new life. There are the new 
dwellings, the new public buildings, the 
highway improvements, the development 
of a new culture and of a new economic 
life amid the walls of an ancient town. 
It is a bustling place. While some of her 
business firms establish connections in the 
Balkans, others contract for engineering 
work in China. And so it goes. No- 
where, except possibly in England, do 
sports play such a conspicuous part among 
all classes of people. 

There is diversity in Czechoslovakia. 
There are the forests, the spas, and pils- 
ner beer. Industry and agriculture are 
making for the economic success of the 
republic; but, above all, there is a demo- 
cratic tolerance gradually weaving into a 
homogeneous unit the divers peoples of 
various interests and backgrounds. 

These achievements have been possible 
because Czechoslovakia is one of the rich- 
est stretches of territory in Europe, gen- 
erously endowed with woods, soft and hard 
coal, iron, graphite, and salt. She also 
produces gold, silver, copper, and lead. 
There are textile, stone, and glass fac- 
tories. She manufactures furniture, ma- 
chines, metals, paper, and chemicals. She 
exports woolen and cotton goods and 
sugar. But, vastly more important, there 




stands the saving grace of intelligence ex- 
tending on into statesmanship and social 
achievement, a new tribute to the benefi- 
cence of democratic forms. 

ALES BE02 has succeeded Dr. Soucek 
- as editor of the Central European 
Observer, published in Prague, capital of 
Czechoslovakia. We count this publica- 
tion among the best sources of our in- 
formation relative to central European 
affairs. For six years it has been an able 
weekly exponent of the interests of 
Czechoslovakia and of the Little Entente, 
and, too, a dispassionate interpreter of 
Austria, Hungary, Germany, and Poland. 
From this distance we have gathered the 
distinct impression that it has helped very 
materially not only to maintain peaceful 
relations between Czechoslovakia and her 
sister States, but to solve those most diffi- 
cult problems connected with the minori- 
ties throughout Czechoslovakia. We ex- 
tend to Mr. Broz, scholarly economist, our 
best wishes in his new and important task. 

is to speak at the conference in Cleve- 
land, May 10, is more than the most 
famous pianist of his day. He is that. 
He is more than a great humanitarian. 
He is all that. He is an orator and the 
creator of modern Poland. Speaking 
upon this point, Preston William Slos- 
son. Assistant Professor of History at the 
University of Michigan, in his recent 
book, "Twentieth Century Europe," says: 
"Paderewski represented Polish in- 
terests so ably in Paris that he won most 
of what he asked and more than he could 
reasonably have expected to obtain. A 
diplomat of ability, an orator of singular 
force and charm, and a patriotic leader 
whose personal ascendency can hardly be 
matched in our day" — these are the meas- 
ured views of the historian. His separa- 
tion from affairs of state has been due 

probably to his lack of interest in factional 
strife and administrative technic. In 
any event, the delegates to the Cleveland 
conference will welcome the opportunity 
to greet this distinguished man, this time 
not because of his great achievements in 
art, but because of those abilities which 
made him the father of the Polish Ee- 

THE United States Government is 
pursuing its persistent course in the 
interest of peace. March 8 negotiations 
between the United States and Italy, sim- 
ilar to the treaty recently signed with 
France, began. Already our government 
was negotiating the same kind of a treaty 
with Great Britain and Japan. March 
10 we began negotiations with Norway 
in the interest of such a treaty. March 
13 the Secretary of State handed to the 
German Ambassador, as a basis of negoti- 
ation, a proposed draft of a treaty of arbi- 
tration between Germany and the United 
States, a treaty identical with the one 
signed by the United States and France 
on February 6. On the same day a sim- 
ilar treaty was handed to the Spanish 
Ambassador, of special interest because 
the arbitration treaty between the United 
States and Spain, signed April 20, 1908, 
expired by limitation on June 2, 1923. 
March 15 a proposed draft of a treaty 
of arbitration between Japan and United 
States was handed to the Japanese Am- 
bassador in Washington. 

THE principles upon which the Inter- 
parliamentary Union rests, tested 
throughout a generation, are finding ex- 
pression in new and interesting ways. 
There is an Interparliamentary Com- 
mercial Union, which meets from time 
to time. Scandinavian governments have 
organized an Interparliamentary Group 
among themselves. There has long been 
an attempt to maintain a Japanese- 




American Interparliamentary Group, a 
favorite interest of William D. B. Ainey, 
former member of the United States Con- 
gress. And now Hon. Eafael Brache, 
member of the Santo Domingo Congress 
and of its Committee on Foreign Rela- 
tions, proposes an American Interparlia- 
mentary Union, similar to the Interpar- 
liamentary Union with headquarters in 
Geneva. Mr. Brache during his recent 
stay in Washington conferred relative to 
this matter with members of the United 
States Congress, among whom he found 
no little interest. He proposes that such 
a union, with headquarters in Santo Do- 
mingo, holding annual meetings in various 
American capitals, would co-operate 
closely with the Pan American Union. 
Speaking upon this matter, Mr. Brache 

"May .this idea of the American Inter- 
parliamentary League be accepted with 
enthusiasm by the governing board of the 
Pan American Union, the diplomatic 
corps, the Government of the United 
States, and general public opinion of the 
Americas, for, since it has been impossible 
to create a League of American Nations, 
it is necessary, in order to promote co- 
operation among the peoples of the hemi- 
sphere, that there be established some 
organization along the lines of the Inter- 
parliamentary League by which the peo- 
ples of America may co-operate through 
their respective legislatures, and which 
may serve as a medium of information and 
co-operation for the Pan American 

In our opinion the distinguished states- 
man from our sister republic might well 
have added that such a group would of 
course co-operate also with the older and 
parent organization operating so success- 
fully under the leadership of Dr. Chris- 
tian L. Lange. 

guished scholar and interpreter of 
international affairs, particularly of facts 
relating to the World War, is the editor 
of a new monthly magazine called Der 
Krieg, published by E. Laubsche Verlags- 
buchhandlung G. m. b. H., Berlin W. 30, 
Gleditschstr. 6. The first number began 
with February, 1928. The March number 
has also arrived. From these numbers it 
is already apparent that readers of the 
German language are to have a regular 
and worthily scientific interpretation of 
the accredited peace movement. Dr. 
Kanner knows his history. That the new 
magazine is to relate to the actual experi- 
ence of nations is ably set forth in the first 
editorial of the first number, under the 
title Zmeck und Ziel. Already it appears 
that here is a magazine of incalculable 
help for educated persons desiring to in- 
form themselves further of the realities in 
the movement to promote peace between 
nations. We are proud to add that its 
editor has long been a life member of the 
American Peace Society, and pleased to 
note that the cover adopted was inspired 
by the cover of the Advocate of Peace. 

THE Eussian proposal for complete 
disarmament has met with decided 
opposition in Geneva. The proposal in- 
cluded a plan for the complete disbanding 
of all military units on land or sea and 
in the air within four years from the 
entry into force of the proposals. In the 
first year under the plan one-half of the 
effectives in service shall be disbanded, 
and in the following three years the re- 
maining forces would be disbanded in 
equal parts. It includes fortifications, 
military industry, all land, sea, and air 
armaments. Local police, customs, for- 
est, and other guards would be limited 
for a period of four years to the numbers 
maintained on January 1, 1928. Protec- 




tion at sea would be provided by mari- 
time police service, for which the Eus- 
sians propose to divide the waters of the 
world into sixteen zones. Within three 
months of the coming into force of the 
proposed agreement a permanent commis- 
sion of control would be established and 
committees of control would be set up in 
each of the contracting States. In our 
opinion, this plan is of little interest, ex- 
cept as an expression of a certain class of 
opinion definitely opposed to war. We 
believe it to be impractical, for nations 
will not go about their business that way. 
If adopted, it would not establish peace 
because it nations wish to fight they will 
do so, armaments or no armaments. 

THE Academy of International Law 
at The Hague, founded with the sup- 
port of the Carnegie Endowment for 
International Peace, is entering upon its 
sixth year. Its headquarters in the Pal- 
ace of Peace at The Hague will open for 

its courses of instruction this year, July 
2 to 28, and its second period from July 
30 to August 25. The lecturers this year 
will come from the Catholic Institute of 
Paris, from the President of the Supreme 
Court of Danzig, from professors in the 
University of Paris, Columbia University, 
New York, the University of Florence, the 
University of Liege, the University of 
Petrograd, the University of Athens, the 
University of Brussels, the University of 
Buenos Aires, the University of Geneva, 
the University of Oxford, the University 
of Lisbon, the League of Nations, the 
University of Turin, the University of 
Zurich, the University of Lwow, and the 
University of Cambridge. The fore- 
gathering of students from various parts 
of the world listening to lectures and par- 
ticipating in discussions led by men of 
such standing and diverse experiences 
creates a happy picture in the mind of 
all concerned to create a more intelligent 
international outlook. 



Twenty-fifth Annual Meeting, February 24, 1928 


THE Twenty-fifth Annual Meeting of 
the American Group of the Inter- 
parliamentary Union was held in the 
Committee Eoom of the House Commit- 
tee on Naval Affairs, House Oflfice Build- 
ing, Washington, D. C, this day, begin- 
ning at 10:30 o'clock a. m., Hon. Theo- 
dore E. Burton, the President, presiding. 
Those present who took part in the pro- 
ceedings were : Hon, Theodore E, Burton, 
President; Hon. Andrew J. Montague, 

Vice-President; Hon. Adolph J. Sabath, 
Treasurer; Arthur Deerin Call, Executive 
Secretary; Hon. Sol Bloom, Hon. Fred A. 
Britten, Hon. Carl E. Chindblom, Hon. 
Henry Allen Cooper, Hon. Edgar How- 
ard, Hon. Jed Johnson, Hon. James G. 
McLaughlin, Hon. Melvin J. Maas, Hon. 
Stephen G. Porter, Hon. Fred S. Purnell, 
Hon. Elmer Thomas, and Hon. Henry W. 




The President: The meeting will 
please come to order. Shall we listen to 
the reading of the minutes? 

The Executive Secretary (Mr. 
Call) : Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, the 
minutes of the last meeting were printed 
in the Congressional Record for February 
16, 1928. You may wish, therefore, to 
omit the reading of the minutes. 

Mr. Montague : I move that the read- 
ing of the minutes be omitted. 

(Upon being put to vote, the reading 
of the minutes was dispensed with.) 

The President: Now comes the Ex- 
ecutive Secretary's report. 

The Executive Secretary (Mr. 
Call) : Mr. Chairman, the Congressional 
Record for February 16 contains our by- 
laws and a fairly complete report for the 
year. The Paris conference report, how- 
ever, lacks two things which ought to be 
a part of the record, and I therefore call 
your attention to them here. 

One is the fact that Mr. Bartholdt, who 
is a life member of the Interparliamen- 
tary Union, delivered an address and pre- 
sented a draft treaty for general arbitra- 
tion. The address appears in the Compte 
Rendu of the Conference, and the treaty 
has been printed in the Bulletin of the 
Interparliamentary Union. 

Mr. William D. B. Ainey, of Harris- 
burg, Pennsylvania, also a life member 
of our group and of the Union, called a 
meeting in Paris, at which he reviewed 
the pre-war activities of the American- 
Japanese Section of the Interparliamen- 
tary Union, which were suspended during 
the war. 

On motion of Hon. Eoy G. Fitzgerald, 
Member of Congress, Mr. Ainey was 
unanimously elected President of this sec- 
tion, and, upon a similar motion, Hon. K. 
Nakamura, member of the Imperial Par- 
liament of Japan, was unanimously 
elected Vice-President. 

Upon motion, it was unanimously 
agreed that the president and vice-presi- 
dent be authorized, after conference with 
their respective groups, to arrange a pro- 
gram for the next meeting of the Amer- 
ican-Japanese Section. All the Japanese 
and American representatives to the 
Paris Conference of the Interparliamen- 
tary Union, either personally or by au- 
thority, expressed their adherence to and 
interest in the organization of the Amer- 
ican-Japanese Section. 

A list of the representatives, either ac- 
tually present or represented by such au- 
thorizations, revealed that there are eight 
Japanese and fourteen American mem- 
bers of the group. 

We have received twenty copies of the 
report of the Paris Conference, all but 
three of which have been distributed. 
Extra copies have been ordered from 

I think it ought to be mentioned again 
that the Interparliamentary Union pub- 
lishes bimonthly a periodical known as 
the Interparliamentary Bulletin. That is 
the official organ of the Interparliamen- 
tary Union. It contains documents of 
importance and outlines of what is going 
on in the Interparliamentary Union from 
time to time. If any of you wish that 
Bulletin, it will cost forty cents a year in 
American money. The Interparliamen- 
tary Union publishes other publications. 

Mr. Montague: How generally is that 
Bulletin sent now to members of the 
Union here? 

The Executive Secretary: I think 
it is about twenty copies now that are 
distributed here. That is a copy of it 
(exhibiting copy). 

Mr. Montague: Is that in French? 

The Executive Secretary: No; it 
is in English. It is issued in English, 
French, and German. 

Now, gentlemen, you will be interested 
to know that the Council of the Inter- 
parliamentary Union is to have a meeting 
on the 2d day of April, 1928, the place of 
the meeting being Prague, Czechoslo- 
vakia. The final convocation will be 
shortly sent out. Here is the agenda of 
that meeting of the Council. I mention 
it to you because we have two members 
of the Council, Mr. Burton and Mr. 
Montague, and whether or not we should 
be represented at the meeting of the 
Council is for this body to decide. 

There will be on the agenda the ap- 
proval of the minutes of the previous 
meeting; communication of the program 
of the Bureau for 1928; report of the 
auditors; convocation of the Twenty-fifth 
Conference; fixation of the agenda of the 
conference and communication of certain 
draft resolutions to be submitted to the 
conference; application of Article X of 
the statutes fixing the number of votes 




allowed to each group at the next con- 

You know we are allowed now under 
the rule to be represented by twenty-four 
delegates. It is probable that on this 
agenda there will be a revision of certain 
provisions in the statutes and regulations 
on the basis of proposals made by the or- 
ganizations committee. It is probable 
that they will nominate a Treasurer of 
the Union. 

There is nothing very startling on this 
agenda. It is not expected that the 
Council will make any vital alteration in 
the program of the Berlin Conference, 
which is fixed, as follows: 

1. General Debate. 

2. The Evolution of the Representative 

3. Migration Problems. 

4. Drafting of "Fundamental Prin- 
ciples for the Collective Life of States." 

In connection with the Evolution of 
the Representative System 

Mk. Cooper: What was that last one? 

The Executive Secretary: Drafting 
of "Fundamental Principles for the Col- 
lective Life of States." 

Mr. Cooper: What does that mean? 

The President : A platform in regard 
to the relations of the respective States 
to each other. The propositions that 
have been laid down by the committee are 
given on page 231 of the Interparlia- 
mentary Bulletin for November and 
December, and if we have time I will 
read that. 

The Executive Secretary: In con- 
nection with the evolution of the rep- 
resentative system, attention is called to 
the publications which the Bureau has 
issued, containing the answers of the five 
specialists in political economy consulted 
by the political committee on the ques- 
tion of the representative system. 

The President: If I may interrupt 
there for a minute, I would suggest to the 
members the reading of those articles. 
They are exceedingly valuable to any stu- 
dent of parliamentary procedure, the 
place that the government parliaments 
should have in the government of nations, 
the question whether parliamentary 
bodies are losing prestige, and the reasons 
therefor. Those are to be published in a 
book which costs four Swiss francs. I 

am frank to say I have not read them 
all. There is one by Professor Harold J. 
Laski, professor of political science at the 
London School of Economics which con- 
tains some of the most valuable sugges- 
tions in regard to legislative bodies that 
I have ever met. Then there is Profes- 
sor Bonn, professor of the Institute of 
Higher Commercial Studies, at Berlin: 
Professor Borgeaud, professor of the Uni- 
versity of Geneva; Professor Larnaude. 
dean and emeritus professor of the 
Faculty of Law of Paris University, and 
Professor Gaetano Mosca, Senator of the 
Kingdom of Italy and professor at the 
University of Rome. 

One or two of these men represent a 
class of representatives in legislative 
bodies that we would hardly have in this 
country, men whose main activities are 
devoted to studies, professors in univer- 
sities who are members of the senates or 
of the other house and have thereby a 
legislative connection. I most cordially 
recommend the reading of those articles. 
They are in English, and you will learn 
a great deal that is valuable. 

Mr. Howard: Where will we find 
them ? 

Tile President: They are scattered 
through these issues of the Interparlia- 
mentary Bulletin. For instance, the is- 
sue for November-December has two. 
They are entitled "The Crisis in the Par- 
liamentary System." Some one made the 
suggestion that legislative bodies were 
losing their hold, and thus that expres- 
sion, "The Crisis," is used as the title. 
The November-December issue has the 
articles by Professor Bonn and Professor 
Gaetano Mosca. 

Mr. Chindblom: Is that the begin- 
ning of the series? 

The President: No. Those are all, 
I believe. 

Mr. Cooper: They are to be in one 
volume ? 

The President: One volume. 

A Voice: How can that be procured? 

The Executive Secretary: If you 
will give me your name and address, I 
will send it or see that it is sent to you. 

The President: Those discussions, 
while in a measure academic, are one of 
the most valuable activities of the Inter- 
parliamentary Union. 




The Executive Seceetary: In addi- 
tion to the Council meeting, which is to 
be held in Prague, there will be held, 
March 29 and March 30, meetings of the 
Juridical and Political and Organization 
committees, sitting simultaneously. These 
two committees will have to prepare the 
final draft of the resolutions on the 
drafting of "Fundamental Principles for 
the Collective Life of States" and "The 
Evolution of the Eepresentative System,*'' 
to be submitted to the conference in 

The political and organization commit- 
tee will also discuss the question of 
amending certain provisions in the stat- 
utes and regulations in order to bring 
them into conformity with the present 

On March 21 the Committee for Social 
Questions, to prepare a report on immi- 
gration problems, will meet with the Ex- 
ecutive Committee. 

Prague has been chosen as a place of 
meeting on the invitation of the Czecho- 
slovak group. The group, moreover, in- 
tends to arrange for facilities to be ex- 
tended to the delegates to enable them 
to visit the country. Czechoslovakia, as 
you know, is not only interesting for its 
picturesqueness, but also offers to the stu- 
dent of economic and political questions 
a valuable study of a country in the proc- 
ess of evolving national unity out of 
fragments of what used to be the Austro- 
Hungarian Empire. This, together with 
the interesting nature of the questions 
before the various committees, leads the 
Bureau at Geneva to hope that they will 
have present representatives from the 
American group at Prague the latter part 
of March and the first of April. 

The President: In that connection, I 
want to state that we are at very consid- 
erable disadvantage at these meetings of 
the Interparliamentary Union, for the 
reason that the propositions to be brought 
up before each successive conference are 
considered at these meetings of the Coun- 
cil. I consider that it would be imprac- 
ticable for either Governor Montague or 
myself to attend that meeting at Prague 
at the ending of March and the begin- 
ning of April, and the result, of course, 
will be that we shall go to a meeting of 
the conference and find certain resolutions 

already drafted. We have always been 
listened to with the utmost respect, but 
in order to give the fullest effect to the 
activities of this group, it is quite desir- 
able that we should be present at those 
sessions. That could be partly provided 
for by our framing of resolutions on the 
respective subjects to be considered and 
forwarding them before the committees 
of the Council meet. 

Mr. Howard: Would it not be pos- 
sible, in view of the fact that our Presi- 
dent and Vice-President say that they 
cannot attend, to secure volunteers? 

The President : If anyone can go and 
will volunteer, that will be very good, 
but I take it that, it being a season when 
the Congress is in session here, and prob- 
ably at the height of its activity, it would 
be very difficult to get anyone to go. 
Again, it would have to be some one who 
is familiar with the general work of the 
Union and of the activities of the con- 

Mr. How^ard: My colleagues have no 
opposition in the primary. 

Mr, Montague : Congress is in session. 

The Execumve Secretary: Mr. 
President, there is one other thing to re- 
port, and that ends my report, and that 
is that the next meeting of the confer- 
ence of the Interparliamentary Union 
will be held in the City of Berlin, upon 
the invitation of the German group, prob- 
ably from July 15th on, lasting for about 
a week. 

The President: It all depends on the 
time the elections are to be held in Ger- 
many. If the election is to be postponed 
until some time, say, in the summer — 
June or July — that means one thing. If 
the elections are held earlier, there would 
probably be an adjournment, and they 
wish the conference to meet while the 
Eeischstag is in session. I have very 
strongly urged in the meeting of Council 
the latest convenient date. In that I 
was supported by the English delegates. 
Their Parliament usually remains in ses- 
sion until the end of July, and I am satis- 
fied they will give all possible attention 
to the joint requests of the two countries. 

I should very much regret if we are 
not to be represented at that meeting, be- 
cause we were at Paris, and if we do not 
attend the conference in Germany it 




would evoke some unfriendly feeling. On 
the other hand, it is a question whether 
we could get away from here after the 
adjournment of Congress in time to at- 
tend. The promise is that they will cable 
me when the Council meets, about the 
first of April, and then I will circulate 
the notice around as to when it is to 

Is there anything further, Mr. Call? 

The Executive Seceetary: No, sir. 

Me. Porter: Mr. Secretary, I would 
like to make an inquiry with regard to 
procedure about the Union. As you will 
recall, last summer in Paris all of the 
American resolutions with regard to the 
narcotic drug traffic were approved, but 
before leaving I left another one which 
reads as follows: 

"The Interparliamentary Conference, rec- 
ognizing that, according to the scientific 
and medical opinion of the world, drug ad- 
diction is a disease which demands public 
regulation and correction, and believing that 
the proper treatment of those given to drug 
addiction, important as it is from a humani- 
tarian standpoint, will also lessen the de- 
mand for narcotic drugs, and thus effect a 
curtailment of the illicit traffic and a reduc- 
tion in production, recommends for the con- 
sideration of the groups of the Union the 
adoption of measures by the governments 
concerned with a view to the compulsory 
treatment of drug addicts. 

"The Interparliamentary Bureau is re- 
quested to transmit the present resolution of 
the groups of the Union and to all the gov- 
ernments and parliaments of the world." 

I left that resolution with Mr. Lange, 
assuming that that would become a part 
of the record, but I have a letter here 
from him in which he says: 

"You handed me, before leaving Paris, 
draft of a resolution containing recommenda- 
tion for adoption of measures by the gov- 
ernments as to compulsory treatment of drug 
addicts. I had no occasion to lay this be- 
fore the committee." 

When would that be considered under 
the rules of the Parliamentary Union? 
As I understand it, it must go to the 
committee first, as the other resolutions 

The President: Yes. 

Mr. Porter: And then would be re- 
ported out at the plenary session? 

The Executive Secretary: That 
would naturally come up, I should say, 
before the Council in Prague. 

Mr. Porter: Do you think it would 
be necessary for me to reintroduce it or 
send it in again? 

The Executive Seceetaey: If you 
will give me a copy of it, I will send it. 

The Peesident: That would rather 
emphasize it, I think. Suppose we intro- 
duce a resolution with regard to that, and 
if it be the opinion of the group that 
that should be so, let us send that on to 
the meeting there in March and April. 
I can readily realize how that was lost in 
the shuffle at the end of the session. Those 
things have to go to the Council and com- 
mittee before they are considered. 

Me. Poeter: Well, I will say to the 
group that it is in entire harmony with 
a bill which I have introduced the other 
day. We have about 6,500 prisoners in 
the Federal penitentiaries, which can 
only accommodate about 3,000. Between 
two thousand and twenty-three hundred 
of those prisoners are drug addicts. The 
country, and I guess the medical profes- 
sion, has now come around to the view 
that drug addiction is a disease, and not 
a vice, in an overwhelming majority of 
cases. So I introduced a bill the other 
day, in view of the fact that we had to 
build new penitentiaries, that instead of 
building new penitentiaries we build a 
couple of institutions for the care of these 
addicts, giving the Attorney General the 
power to remove the addicts, in his dis- 
cretion, from the penitentiaries to these 
institutions for proper treatment. 

I will not take your time too much 
with it, but if a man is suffering from 
drug addiction he will never recover in a 
prison cell. He needs fresh air, good 
food, and healthy environment, and the 
moment they discharge the man with, say, 
ten or fifteen dollars in his pocket and 
with his frenzied desire for this drug, he 
will commit many crimes in order to 
secure money to buy the drug, and I have 
discussed this with a great many people, 
and it seems to meet with the unanimous 
approval of everyone, especially of mem- 
bers, and I am very anxious to have this 
resolution considered at the next meeting 
of the Interparliamentary Union. Of 




course, our own local bill will take care 
of the situation here. 

The President : There are two courses 
to pursue. It is already there and natu- 
rally would be considered by the commit- 
tee, but we can reinforce that by sending 
a letter asking them — I could send it my- 
self or the Secretary could — or if the 
group thinks it best we might pass a reso- 
lution giving special consideration to it. 

Mr. Porter : That would give it greater 

The President : Yes. If you will in- 
troduce such a resolution that the group 
approve that proposition, we can discuss 
and present it, and do I understand that 
you do introduce it as a motion? 

Mr. Porter: Yes. 

The President: You have heard the 

Mr. Howard: Just what was the 
motion ? 

The President: That the group ap- 
prove the resolution presented by Mr. Por- 
ter and transmit it to the Secretary Gen- 
eral of the Interparliamentary Union, a 
copy of which has been read. 

Mr. Howard: I move that the group 
approve that resolution. 

Mr. Montague: I second that motion. 

(The motion was put and unanimously 

The President : Now, I think perhaps 
it might be well for you, Mr. Porter, to 
state briefly what occurred in the meet- 
ings of the Union at Paris. I regarded 
the acceptance of the American conten- 
tions with regard to the use of narcotics 
as one of the triumphs of our delegation 
at that time. The resolution has been 
pending for some time before the Paris 
group. You may say that they accepted 
in toto your contentions? 

Mr. Porter: Yes. It is rather diffi- 
cult to boil it down. As you know, the 
Geneva Opium Conference was held in 
1923 and 1924. I was chairman of the 
American delegation, and we withdrew 
largely because we could not get the Bri- 
tish and French and Portugese and 
Spanish to fix a definite time for the 
suppression of the traffic in prepared 
opium, as provided in Article VI of 
Chapter 2 of The Hague Opium Conven- 
tion. In that article the contracting 
power agreed to suppress progressively 
the traffic in prepared opium. 

Prepared opium is that which is used 
for smoking or eating. It is eaten in 
India an(J smoked in the colonies of these 
European powers out in the Orient. We 
contended that, ten years having elapsed 
and that no effort had been made to sup- 
press this traffic in the colonies of these 
four countries, we were entitled to have 
a definite time fixed. We fixed ten years. 
Later, we increased it to fifteen years, and 
still later, in the final hope of coming to 
some sort of an agreement, I offered to 
make it fifteen years, and it should not 
take effect until the treaty was ratified, 
but I found that, largely on account of 
revenue, it was impossible, and we with- 
drew. There were other matters, but that 
was the main one. 

You see, they produce opium out there 
by the hundreds of tons, and the seepage 
from that opium or from the transporta- 
tion of that opium enters our country 
through the smokers and causes a great 
deal of trouble. Brushing aside, of 
course, the idea of having one law for 
the East and one for the West, it is a 
penitentiary offense to seU a grain of 
morphine in the United States or Eng- 
land or France or any of those coun- 
tries, while you can buy it by hundreds 
of pounds in the Orient, just like you 
buy groceries. 

When the Interparliamentary Union 
met in Washington, Dr. Brabec, of 
Czechoslovakia, brought over a resolution 
urging ratification of the treaty which 
was made at Geneva. As I recall the 
language of his resolution it was this: 
that, while these treaties made only some- 
what of a modest advance, the Interpar- 
liamentary Union urged their ratification, 
and also that the defects be cured. I got 
into conference with Dr. Brabec and final- 
ly convinced him that a body represent- 
ing the members of the highest legisla- 
tive bodies in the world could hardly af- 
ford to say that these treaties were prac- 
tically valueless and still urge their rati- 
fication. Dr. Brabec agreed with me 
about it, and the resolution was put in 
this form, that after the treaties had 
been perfected, as suggested in the resolu- 
tion, that they should be ratified. 

It was not considered in Washington 
for some reason. It was postponed to 
Ottawa, so I went up to Ottawa about a 




week later, and there they had two items 
on the agenda — the rights of minorities 
and opium. The debate on the rights of 
minorities was to be closed at 3 o'clock, 
but they discussed it until 6, when Sir 
Eobert Home got up, and I will never 
forget it — I have seen steam rollers be- 
fore — but he said, "I venture to suggest 
in all humiliation that we have a dinner 
with the Canadian Parliament at 8 
o'clock, and this matter should go over 
to the Geneva meeting next summer," and 
the chairman of the meeting announced 
that there would only be the one subject 
heard, and there was a vote of 39 to 37 
in favor of postponement. So then I 
went to Geneva the next summer. 

The Peesident : That was not a meet- 
ing of the Conference. That was a meet- 
ing of the committees. 

Mr. Porter: Of the committees, and 
I not only advocated Dr. Brabec's resolu- 
tion, but introduced two of my own, one 
the original American proposition, urging 
the governments, or those governments 
which had not done so, to agree to stop 
the traffic in prepared opium within ten 
years; also, a resolution urging the gov- 
ernments to prohibit the manufacture of 
heroin, which we have done in this coun- 
try two years ago, on the recommendation 
of the American Medical Association. I 
may say, in regard to heroin, that it is by 
all odds the most dangerous of these 

A Voice: What is heroin made of? 

Mr. Porter: Heroin is made out of 
morphine. It is briefly this: The med- 
ical profession has never been able to find 
a substitute for morphine. Without 
morphine the practice of medicine would 
be a most unhappy one, and that is the 
difficulty in suppressing the traffic in mor- 
phine. We must have it for people who 
are dying with cancer and tuberculosis. 
But it has the bad effect of nausea and 
is habit-forming. For hundreds of years 
we have been trying to find a substitute 
for it. A German chemist about 1906 
found a substitute. It was widely adver- 
tised all over the world as the long- 
sought-for substitute, but it was not ap- 
plicable. It was taken up by many 
American physicians, who became ad- 
dicted to heroin, and we now know that 
it is the most dangerous of all drugs, 

and the American Medical Association in 
1923 condemned its use. There is only 
one instance where it is of any value, and 
that is in the case of very severe bron- 
chitis; but there is another drug, codeine, 
which takes its place. But heroin — and 
I want to impress this upon you — if we 
can solve the heroin problem we have 
gone a long ways. The discovery of 
heroin and its sale throughout the world 
is responsible for the serious condition 
of addiction that we have today. The 
morphine addict, as a rule, does not do 
any particular harm to society, unless his 
craze for the drug is such, and he cannot 
buy it, he will resort to crime to obtain 

So I presented that resolution, and 
your President will remember we had 
quite a contest at Geneva, and the vote 
on the heroin was unanimous, the vote 
on the limitation of the production of ar- 
senic was unanimous, but the vote upon 
fixing a definite time for the suppression 
of the traffic in opium was nine to seven. 
Great Britain and Jugoslavia opposing it. 

When we got to Paris the resolutions 
were called up and they were all passed. 
The only opposition came from the Brit- 
ish, and that was for fixing a definite 
period for the suppression of this traffic 
in prepared opium. 

The difficulty there, I might as well 
be perfectly candid about it, is twofold: 
In many of those colonies the revenue 
derived from the government cocaine 
shops goes quite a long ways toward pay- 
ing the expenses of the colonial govern- 
ments. In the Straits Settlements it is 
about 47 per cent; in India it is about 7 
per cent, and in the Dutch East Indies it 
is about the same. In Indo-China the 
French get about 26 per cent. Of course, 
that was the real opposition, and then 
there was another element in it. A great 
many of the Chinese coolies drift into 
these settlements, where they perform the 
menial labor. They naturally seek the 
association of their own countrymen. 
Many of these are smokers and many of 
the new men acquire the habit, and once 
a man acquires the smoking habit he is a 
slave ; he is helpless. It is not like a man 
getting drunk, and they have to increase 
the dose as the tolerance of the system 
increases, until finally they get in a con- 




dition of abject slavery, and it insures a 
steady supply of menial labor throughout 
the entire season at the rubber and poppy 
and the other plantations. 

There are two elements in it, the reve- 
nue and the question of menial labor. 

This resolution, while it may sound 
rather innocent on its face, I think will 
be quite helpful, because when we press 
it, it is going to put these countries that 
have held back on the suppression of drug 
traffic in rather an awkward position. 
They cannot recommend to their people 
the compulsory treatment of drug ad- 
dicts, while at the same time they are 
deriving large revenue from the traffic. 

I would like to say this : I regard these 
meetings of the Interparliamentary 
Union as very valuable; if for nothing 
else, it gives one valuable contacts. I 
have been enabled to reach an understand- 
ing with two governments through these 
conferences, and I know it is going to be 
productive of very helpful results. 

Mr. Watson: Where did the chief op- 
position come from? 

Mr. Porter: The British and Jugo- 
slavs. ' 

Mr. Watson: Was it developed that 
the people over there were stockholders 
in the companies engaged in this traffic? 

Mr. Porter: Oh, no; this is a Govern- 
ment monopoly. 

The President : It is a very old ques- 
tion, reaching back to the war in China 
in about 1838 or 1840. Jugoslavia also 
is a producer of opium, and they oppose 
it. It was a matter of very serious op- 
position, especially in the meeting of the 
Council and the Committee at Geneva in 
1926, but at Paris in 1927 the resolution 
was adopted substantially. 

Mr. Watson: Where does Jugoslavia 
produce opium? 

The President : They produce a great 
share, about a million pounds worth, they 

Mr, Watson : Of poppy ? 

The President: Yes, of poppy, and 
from that opium. 

Mr. Watson: Where do they produce 

The President: I do not know what 
part of the country it is. 

The Executive Secretary: Their 

sales amount to about five million dollars 
a year. 

The President: Jugoslavia and Tur- 
key produce high class opium. 

Mr. Sabath : I think it is in the state 
of Herzegovina, in the southern section 
of Jugoslavia. 

The President : At any rate that was 
the country that opposed the proposition 
at Geneva. 

Are there any other reports of dele- 
gates to the Twenty-fourth Conference? 
If there are no further remarks in regard 
to the meeting at Paris, we will pass to 
the election of officers. Has anybody any 
motion with regard to that? 

Mr. Montague: Mr. Chairman, I 
move that Mr. Burton be elected presi- 
dent of the American group of the Inter- 
parliamentary Union. 

Mr. Howard: I second the motion. 
Mr. Montague: If it is agreeable, can 
I occupy the chair for a moment and put 
the question? 

The President: Certainly. 
(The question was put and unani- 
mously carried.) 

The President: I thank you, gentle- 

Now, with regard to the other officers, 
the three vice-presidents, the treasurer, 
the secretary, the executive secretary and 
executive committee. 

Mr. Chindblom: Who are the three 
vice-presidents now, please? 

The Executive Secretary : The three 
vice-presidents are Eepresentative Andrew 
J. Montague, Representative Henry W. 
Temple and Eepresentative William A. 

Mr. Britten: Mr. President, I move 
that the three vice-presidents be reelected. 
(The motion was put and unanimously 

The Executive Secretary: The 
treasurer is Representative Adolph J. 

Mr. Britten : Has he ever rendered an 
accounting ? 

The Executive Secretary: Oh, yes. 
Mr. Britten: With that information 
before the committee, I move that he be 

(The motion was put and unanimously 




The President : The next is the secre- 

The Executive Secretary: Eepre- 
sentative John J. Mc Swain of South 

The President: He is not here to- 
day, but we all know that he takes quite 
an interest in these matters. 

Mr. Britten: I move that he be 
elected to succeed himself. 

(The motion was put and unanimously 

The President: The Executive Secre- 
tary is Mr. Call. 

Mr. Howard : I nominate Mr. Call. 

(The motion was put and unanimously 

The President: The Executive Com- 
mittee — will you please read the present 
names ? 

The Executive Secretary: The Ex- 
ecutive Committee consists of Representa- 
tive Theodore E. Burton, Chairman, ex- 
officio; Representative Fred Britten, Rep- 
resentative Tom Connally, Representative 
Henry Allen Cooper, Representative 
Clarence F. Lea, Representative James C. 
McLaughlin, Senator Alben W. Barkly, 
Senator Charles Curtis, Senator Joseph 
T. Robinson, and Senator Claude A. 

Mr. Chindblom: I move the re-elec- 
tion of the executive committee. 

(The motion was put and unanimously 

The President: It is to be borne in 
mind that no member is excluded from 
the work of the Union because it does not 
belong on that executive committee. 
Now, the two members of the Council — 
are they elected here? 

The Executive Secretary: Yes, sir. 
The two members of the Council are Mr. 
Burton and Mr. Montague. 

Mr. Howard: Mr. President, I nomi- 
nate Mr. Burton and Mr. Montague. 

Mr. Britten: I second the nomina- 

(Mr. Howard put the motion and it 
was unanimously carried.) 

The President: That completes the 
election of officers. The next item is 
"Unfinished Business." I want to make 
one suggestion. There has been a great 
deal of correspondence in regard to the 
problem of immigration. That has been 

up before the Union and before the Con- 
ferences for quite a number of years. We 
have a definite opinion in this country 
in that regard, I think, that it is exclu- 
sively a domestic question. For instance, 
in this statement of the fundamental prin- 
ciples for the collective life of states — 
this is a proposition which will be pend- 
ing at the meeting at Geneva — I find this 
statement. Section 13 : 

"The right to admit or expulse" — that 
word "expulse" was chosen by someone 
not altogether familiar with English. 

— "expulse aliens should be regulated 
in international conventions containing 
provisions for the right of appeal." 

I think you can readily interpret what 
that means, that if one country wishes 
to send its redundant population into an- 
other country, its right to do so shall be 
regulated by treaty between them. It 
takes it away from the position that we 
have always maintained in this country, 
that it is a purely local problem, and 
makes it international. 

After consultation with a considerable 
number of members of the group I have 
taken the liberty to send a cablegram in 
December and later a letter to that ef- 
fect, that we regard that as strictly and 
purely a domestic problem. If there is 
any other notion anybody has on it, I 
would like to hear it. 

Mr. Cooper: If I remember correctly, 
more than one President has announced 
that that position is not only non-justifi- 
able, but that we could do nothing else 
than retain exclusive power in such cases 
to ourselves. President Roosevelt said 
so, and he simply confirmed what I think 
Cleveland had said before. This goes, as 
I understand, as indicated by you in your 
statement, to the very life of the nation, 
because if they can force any people into 
a country they can eventually control the 
electorate. So it affects the very life of 
a country, and the country itself, there- 
fore, must be the sole judge in the mat- 

Mr. Montague: I had a letter from 
Mr. Lange upon that topic. He told me 
he had written you, Mr. Burton. I wrote 
at once to him and told him that that sub- 
ject was always considered an internal, 
domestic one, that it was not a subject 
for international consideration. My at- 




titude upon that subject was not solely 
an American attitude, I told him; but 
it was international law. In other words, 
nations could not pretend to govern the 
internal affairs of other nations. 

The President : The query is whether 
or not we ought not to introduce a resolu- 

Mr. Watson: In view of the position 
taken by the two members of the Council 
in the absence of the group and speaking 
for the group, I think it would be proper 
now for this body to go on record as 
ratifying and confirming the position 
taken by our President and our Vice- 
President, with reference to their declara- 
tion of this unmistakably American prin- 

The President: Would you accept 
that in any definite form, Mr. Howard, 
a resolution that the group approves the 
statements of the two members of the 
Council ? 

Mr. Howard: Oh, yes. 

The President: That it regards the 
question of immigration as purely a 
domestic problem, to be decided by each 
country, according to its own policies? 

Mr. Howard: I would accept the very 
words of the President as the motion. 

The President: I do not anticipate 
that they are going to adopt any such 
provision as that, but our own policy on 
that subject is unmistakable. 

Mr. Howard: This would give notice. 

Mr, Cooper: Who drew that, Mr. 
President, and who approved it? 

The President: It was this commit- 
tee on the collective life of states. I have 
no idea who drew that. 

Mr. Sabath: Mr. President, though I 
have been a member of the Committee on 
Immigration for over twenty years, and 
known as one who favors a liberal immi- 
gration law, I will say right now that 
I have always insisted that it is a purely 
domestic proposition, and that we should 
not be dictated to by any nation, but our 
policy should be that it is for us to say. 
I believe in fair and humane legislation, 
treating all nationals as fairly as we can, 
without discrimination; but that is as far 
as I ever did go, and as far as I feel we 
should go. Therefore, I second the 
motion of the gentleman from Nebraska. 

Mr. Howard: The substance of the 
motion is the position assumed by the 
President in his wire and letter. 

Mr. Montague: The two members of 
the Council. 

Mr. Chindblom : Should we go a little 
further, and not only declare our approval 
of their position, but declare it as the 
sense of this group? 

Mr. Porter: It might not be out of 
place to refer to the constitutional pro- 
vision that gives us exclusive control. 

The President : In submitting it over 
there, I think it would be well to state 
what the constitutional provision is. I 
do not know but that maybe we better 
have a committee to frame this resolution. 
We all know what is in our minds. 

Mr. Howard: I think that would be 

The President: Shall we submit to 
vote the question of the general opinion 
of the group, which is perfectly clear, 
and then have a committee frame the 
exact language? 

Mr. Montague : As they sometimes do 
in the English Parliament. They ap- 
prove the object and refer it to a com- 
mittee for the formal language. 

The President: Yes. Shall we have 
a vote on the general proposition? 

(The motion was put and unanimously 

The President : I will ask Mr. Chind- 
blom, Governor Montague, and Mr. Por- 
ter to frame the language of the resolu- 
tion, and it might be well to do that at 
an early date, because it wants to be over 
there in plenty of time. 

Mr. Britten : May I suggest also that 
Mr. Sabath be on that committee? 

The President: Mr. Sabath as well, 
a committee of four. The only objection 
to a larger committee is that it is some- 
times hard for them to get together. Let 
me impress upon you the desirability of 
framing that at an early date. I think 
it should be framed a little more carefully 
than we can do just offhand. 

Mr. Maas : Wouldn't it be well to dif- 
ferentiate this question from others and 
point out that it is purely domestic and 
its effect is entirely local, so that later on 
we may not be confronted with that reso- 
lution when Mr. Porter seeks to press his 
resolutions and the British raise the ques- 




tion that it is a matter of internal rev- 

The President: There is a clear dis- 
tinction between the two, I think. 

Mr. Montague: We have had that 
principle involved in several cases. The 
subjects of religion and education have 
been brought up, and I think the Ameri- 
cans have generally taken the ground that 
it is our domestic and not an international 

The President: I am inclined to 
think the sending of such a resolution as 
that will prevent the presentation to the 
conference of any radical proposition on 
this subject. 

Further, under the head of unfinished 
business, this resolution of Mr. Britten's 
should come up. Have you a copy of that ? 

The Executive Secretary : Yes, sir. 
The resolution reads : 

[House Resolution 9205, Seventieth Con- 
gress, first session] 

In the House of Representatives, 

January 12, 1928. 
Mb. Bbitten Introduced thie following bill; 
which was referred to the Committee on 
Foreign Affairs and ordered to be printed: 

A bill to authorize an appropriation for the 
American group of the Interparliamentary 

Be it enacted Jiy the Senate and House of 
Representatives of the United States of 
America in Congress assembled, That in 
order to assist in meeting the annual ex- 
penses of the Interparliamentary Union there 
is hereby authorized an appropriation of 

The President: That is in general 
about the expense of the Interparliamen- 
tary Union, 

The Executive Secretary: The 
American group. 

The President: Yes. That does not 
have any specific mention of the expenses 
of delegates. 

Mr. Britten: No, it does not, Mr. 
Chairman. I felt this way when I intro- 
duced that resolution. When I learned 
that the National Government has never 
defrayed any part of the annual running 
expenses of the American group of the 
Interparliamentary Union, from the pur- 
chase of stationery up or down, I intro- 

duced this resolution. My thought is, if 
we are going to continue this body, if 
it is going to be the representative body 
of members of the United States Govern- 
ment that it should be, the sum of $10,- 
000 is Httle enough to come out of the 
National Treasury for its annual expense. 

Mr. Howard: Wasn't there an appro- 
priation right along? 

Mr. Britten: No. 

The President: There have been 
$6,000 appropriated annually for the ac- 
tivities at Geneva, and Congress did ap- 
propriate $50,000 toward the expenses of 
the twenty-third Conference here in 1925. 
However, that is quite apart from Mr. 
Britten's resolution. 

Mr. Maas: Do any of the other gov- 
ernments, the foreign governments, ap- 
propriate regularly for the expenses of 
their representatives ? 

The President : Oh, yes, particularly 
the northern countries of Europe, such as 
Sweden and Denmark. 

Mr. Chindblom : I want to suggest 
that the resolution as it reads would re- 
late to the expenses of the Interparlia- 
mentary Union itself and not of the Amer- 
ican group. 

Mr. Britten: It is intended for the 
American group alone and solely. 

Mr. Chindblom: It will have to be 

Mr. Watson: Is there anything being 
paid by the particular groups to the gen- 
eral expenses, by themselves? 

Mr. Britten: Oh, yes. They have al- 
ways paid their own expenses. This is 
for the American group itself. You see 
the difference between the two ? 

The President : I take it your idea is 
that this amount should be disbursed 
under the direction of the American group 
for whatever purpose they may conclude 
to be proper? 

Mr. Britten: Yes; all expenses, and 
that might include traveling expenses. It 
will include small expenses for clerical 
expense, stationery, office rent, any form 
of expense that may contribute directly 
to the American group and to the Ameri- 
can group only, and not to the main body 
in Europe. 

Mr. Bloom : How much money did 
vou spend last year or did you have to 
raise? You say^ here $10,000? 




Mr, Beitten: Yes. 

Mr. Bloom : How would that $10,000 
be expended? Would that be too much 
or not enough? What is the average ex- 
pense ? 

The President : There are certain ex- 
penses which might be incurred right 
here. I think it would be well to get a 
certain amount of this literature that they 
are putting out and circulating, so many 
numbers. That is one thing. My conjec- 
ture is, Mr. Britten, you have in mind 
paying part at least of the expenses of 
delegates who go abroad. Is that the fact? 

Mr, Britten : If necessary, I will say 
this, Mr, President, I have made a num- 
ber of trips with the American group, 
and have always paid my own way; but 
then there are other members of the House 
who would go, who would like to go, and 
who should go, who might not be in a 
position to pay their own traveling ex- 
penses, and if that condition presents 
itself and the American group desire to 
be represented by certain distinguished 
gentlemen of the House or Senate, I think 
that the American group ought to pay 
their expenses, at least their traveling ex- 
penses. It is a small item, and in that 
way the United States would be assured 
of proper representation there. 

The President: As regards the pay- 
ing of expenses of the persons going 
abroad, there are certain considerations 
about that. Very reluctantly I am com- 
pelled to say that some persons have gone 
abroad and have received a portion of the 
expenses advanced by the Carnegie En- 
dowment, who have given very little at- 
tention to meetings on the other side. It 
has just been an opportunity for a trip 
to Europe, and we should have, if the ex- 
penses are paid in whole or in part under 
this resolution, some assurance that those 
who receive the amounts are going to 
give close attention to the work of the 
Union in these meetings; I mean to be 
present and not be absorbed in the attrac- 
tions of Paris or Berlin, so as to travel 
aroimd and visit parks and museums, but 
be regular in their attendance. The Con- 
gress will want to know, if we bring this 
up, just what use is to be made of the 
money, and we will have to explain that. 

I do think, however, that we are justified 
in asking this as a recognition of the ac- 
tivities of this group. It seems to me so. 

Mr, Porter: Mr, Chairman, laying 
aside for the moment the inconvenience 
of paying your own expenses, and I must 
confess it has been rather inconvenient 
for me, although I have received substan- 
tial help in the matter, there is another 
element that appeals to me. By attending 
these conferences in proper form and in 
a proper way, we have opportunities to 
wield a tremendous influence in world 
afi^airs. If we go out as American mem- 
bers, without any official recognition from 
our Government, we have one-tenth of the 
prestige we would have if we had back of 
us the official recognition of our Govern- 
ment, and by providing something to pay 
our expenses would give us a little more 
official status, too. It is really much more 
important, to my view, than it is with re- 
gard to the matter of expense. I would 
suggest that a resolution be put in some 
concrete form that the President of the 
American Unit should be authorized to 
designate five or ten members to go, rep- 
resenting the United States Government, 
and that is to be limited to actual travel- 
ing expenses, because you have to eat here 
just as you do over there, and I think 
that it should be provided that the actual 
traveling expenses be paid. 

Mr. Britten : In a fixed amount ? 

Mr. Porter: Oh, yes; fix the amount. 
I would limit it to traveling expenses. I 
think you would get it through the House 
much easier that way than if you covered 
all expenses. But the important thing 
in my mind is this, I can see wonderful 
possibilities in this matter if we go over 
there in at least a semi-official capacity. 
You go over there more or less as an in- 
dividual, and you do not have the pres- 
tige of this great Government behind you. 
There are a great many people in the 
world who want to do things the way 
America does, because we are among the 
successful nations, and we carry some 
weight to these meetings, greater than any 
of us realize. I am perfectly willing to 
help out in this matter, and I hope my 
colleagues on the foreign affairs commit- 
tee feel likewise about it. But I would 
limit it to traveling expenses. 




The Peesident: That is, you would 
limit the whole amount to the payment 
of traveling expenses, and you would not 
apply it to any other purpose? 

Mr. Porter: Oh, printed matter and 
documents, clerical work and things of 
that sort should be included. 

Mr. Purnell: What form of certifi- 
cate do you give to the delegates ? 

The President: A certificate signed 
by the Executive Secretary. 

The Executive Secretary : The Pres- 
ident and Secretary sign the credentials 
in the form of a credentials card. 

Mr. Purnell: It is not a certificate 
stating that he is a delegate representing 
the United States? 

The President: The American group 
of the Interparliamentary Union. 

Mr. Montague : Mr. President, I wish 
to ask to be excused. I approve of this 
resolution, but I have a very imperative 

The President : Very well. 

Mr. Britten : May I say just one word 
further, please? My sole desire, in pre- 
senting this resolution, is the desire that 
the United States be properly represented 
abroad, and I think that great care should 
be used by the President of the American 
group and the other officers who select 
these men to represent us abroad. If this 
resolution does go through the House 
finally and $10,000 is appropriated, I hope 
that you, in your wisdom, will select the 
men who are especially qualified to rep- 
resent the United States in debate over 
there, and not have some of them going 
over there, as they may have done in the 
past, on a mere junket at somebody else's 
expense. I am very earnest about that. 

Mr. Bloom : Would that only apply to 
the people that the President selects to 
attend these conferences? 

Mr. Britten: Any others, like your- 
self, for instance, who may desire to go 
over there and pay their own way, back 
and forth, may do so. But those vs^ho are 
selected by the President should be espe- 
cially qualified for that particular duty, 
and the number is unimportant. Two or 
three distinguished representatives are 
vastly superior and of much greater value 
to our country and to the entire issue than 
fifty or sixty of them merely going over 
there for joy rides. 

Mr. Watson : Anyone would have the 
privilege of debate when he is a delegate ? 
Mr. Bloom : Any Member of Congress 
is entitled to go over there, as I under- 
stand it. 

The President: There are so many 
considerations to this that I think that we 
need to give pretty mature consideration 
to it, and I would suggest something like 
this, that there be a committee composed 
of the members of the foreign affairs com- 
mittee, Mr. Britten and perhaps Governor 
Montague, to consider this and get this 
into shape. I think the views presented 
here are very important. Mr. Porter's 
suggestion that this gives official recog- 
nition to our group and gives it a pres- 
tige there that it otherwise would not have, 
is a good suggestion. And then, Mr. Brit- 
ten's suggestion — he is really the one who 
initiated this movement — that the dele- 
gates should be chosen with a view to their 
taking part in the proceedings and attend- 
ing faithfully on the meetings, is a good 
suggestion. Of course, there are a great} 
many who would wish to pay their own 

Mr. Britten: I wiU say for you, Mr. 
President, that I think you are entitled 
to the entire amount, so far as I am con- 
cerned, because of the very, very valuable 
work you have done over there. 

The President: I have paid my ex- 
penses in going over there. 

Mr. Chindblom : I attended the meet- 
ing at Copenhagen, which is the only one 
that I have had the pleasure of attending. 
My understanding is that we are entitled 
to 24 votes in the conference? 

The President : Yes. 

Mr. Chindblom : We can send as many 
delegates as we like, but we get 24 votes. 
I remember at the conference at Copen- 
hagen the Scandinavian countries had 
hundreds of them from Stockholm, and 
other Scandinavian countries, but they 
only had their number of votes. 

Mr. Bloom : Do we ever have 24 votes ? 

Mr. Chindblom: We always have 24 
votes, but we do not have that many del- 
egates. As a matter of fact, they seldom 
take any formal vote. Everything is usu- 
ally done by unanimous consent. 




Mr. Maas : I do not think there should 
be anything in a resolution that we are 
to make an appropriation for the first two 
years to send 24 delegates abroad, but we 
should have assurance that there would 
be no difference in the designation of the 
delegates, or as to the number, so that we 
won't have one set of official delegates and 
another set of semi-official delegates, but 
all delegates would have the same rights. 
The President: That would inevi- 
tably have to be so. Of course, the idea 
of Mr. Britten, as he expresses it, is so 
that we may be assured of having per- 
sons go who take a real interest in the 
proceedings and who will take part in the 

Mr. Porter: The reason I suggested 
five or ten was because I feel confident 
we could get throgh the House a resolu- 
tion providing for that; but if we go in 
there and say that we were going to send 
twenty-five, we would not get it through. 
The real idea is the prestige it would give 

Mr. Bloom: Up to now, the Govern- 
ment has really taken no recognition in 
sending delegates ? 

The President: No. Well, you have 
to say that with some qualification. The 
Government did do something. The Pres- 
ident of the United States formally pre- 
sented an invitation to the conference at 
Berne in 1924 that the Union should come 
to this country in 1925. He transmitted 
a letter which was read by our Minister 
to Switzerland before the conference in 
1924. So you can hardly say that the 
United States Government has given no 
recognition to this Union. 

Mr. Sabath : And it has appropriated 
from time to time? 

The President: The $6,000 annually 
for the activities at Geneva. 

Mr. Purnell: I think the Chair 
would like to entertain a motion, perhaps, 
that a committee consisting of the five 
members of the Foreign Affairs Commit- 
tee who are here. Governor Montague, Mr. 
Britten, and with Mr. Porter as chairman, 
of course, be appointed to give further 
consideration to this question, with a view 
of putting the matter in proper form — if 
necessary, for the purpose of redrafting 
the biU. 

The President : Would you go further 
than that in presenting it for approval? 
Mr. Purnell: Well, I assume that 
that would have to be done by the Foreign 
Affairs Committee. You mean further 
presenting it to the American group ? 

The President: No. My thought 
would be to present it to the Foreign 
Affairs Committee. 

Mr. Chindblom: With the approval 
of this group? 

The President: Yes, with the ap- 
proval of this group. 

Mr. Purnell : Then I make such a mo- 

Mr. Maas : I amend that motion, that 
the membership be composed by the nam- 
ing of members, and not as members of 
any committee of the House. 

The President: That is, you mean 
those who are to consider this motion and 
present it? 

Mr. Maas: No, by name, and not as 
members of a committee. 

The President : Leave it to the chair 
to appoint the committee. Of course, the 
Foreign Affairs Committee have particular 
advantage because they are to consider the 
question of reporting it. 

The President : Those in favor of the 
motion of Mr. Purnell, as amended, will 
signify the same by saying "Aye." 

(The motion was put and unanimously 
carried. ) 

The President: I want to say that 
I appreciate the interest being taken in 
this meeting. This is altogether the larg- 
est attendance we have ever had at any 

Mr. Chindblom: Will the Chair ap- 
point that committee now? 

The President : I think I had better 
meditate a bit. 

The Executive Secretary: The ar- 
gument on the Britten Kesolution will be 
found in the Congressional Eecord, should 
you wish to look into the facts. Other 
groups are supported by their Govern- 
ments in various ways, and so far as we 
have been able to get that information, it 
is here. This is the Congressional Eecord 
for February 16th, page 3215. 

Practically every group of the Inter- 
parliamentary Union provides for a grant 




included in the State budget for the ex- 
pense of the Union. Many of the groups 
are supported by Government appropri- 
ations. For example, the Danish group 
received in 1926 5,400 Danish crowns and 
a special grant toward the expenses of 
the northern assembly of delegates. The 
Estonian group provides from that por- 
tion of the State budget entitled Inter- 
national expenditure, official journeys, 
for the traveling expenses of its delegates. 
The German group receives a grant of 
15,000 reichmarks from the Government, 
9,000 of which are turned over to the 
Geneva office and the balance used for 
traveling expenses. The Swedish group 
receives a grant of 15,000 Swedish crowns. 
The Norwegian group receives 9,000 Nor- 
wegian crowns for traveling expenses and 
1,200 for administrative expenses. Sub- 
stantial contributions for the traveling ex- 
penses of delegates are received by the 
Bulgarian groups, the Hungarian, the 
Italian, Polish Rumanian, Yugoslav, and 
Czechoslovak groups. A sum of 45,000 
French francs is placed at the disposal of 
the French group. Some of the groups — 
for example, the Egyptian and the Japa- 
nese — are officially constituted by the par- 
liament and the expenses of their delegates 
automatically paid. The South and Cen- 
tral American groups fall also into this 
category. It may be now regarded as the 
exception for the members of the Union 
not to receive contributions toward their 
traveling expenses." 

Mr. President, may I bring up one 
other matter of business? 

The Peesident: Certainly. 

The Executive Seceetary: Gentle- 
men, the fact is, after our Washington 
conference we were complimented by 
many groups for the nature of our enter- 
tainment, and we were particularly com- 
plimented by the French. They wrote 
gracious letters to many officials of our 
group. They sent presents to persons who 
had helped them here, such as guides, in- 
terpreters and other officials. France gave 
the Legion of Honor to the President of 
our group and to the Director of the Con- 

Now, France has been our host dur- 
ing the last summer. Though not in the 
best of financial circumstances, France did 

the best she could, and it was well done. 
In addition to what has already been 
said, we were taken by special train to 
Chantilly one Sunday, as some of you 
will remember. There were many recep- 
tions, by the President of the Republic, 
by the President of the Chamber of Depu- 
tis, by the Secretary of War. We were en- 
tertained with a magnificent dinner at the 
end of the conference. So I have been 
wondering if there is not something that 
we of the American group might do that 
would be gracious and acceptable to the 
people who were responsible for this enter- 
tainment in Paris. 

I have in my hands here a book called 
"The Treaty of 1778," and you will notice 
it is in buff and blue, which were George 
Washington's colors. It contains the 
record of the conferences, the plans, the 
journal of the Congress of September, 
1776. It contains the treaties themselves, 
the treaty of amity and commerce, and 
the treaty of alliance. The treaty is in 
English and in French, side by side, and 
there is the final ratification. I do not 
know what would have become of this 
country of ours had it not been for the 
treaty of 1778. It occurs to me that our 
group might obtain a few copies of these, 
that the officials of the group might in- 
scribe their names somewhere, and that 
copies be presented to the various officials 
of the French group, expressing our ap- 

Mr. Chindblom : Who publishes that ? 

The Executive Seceetaey: This is 
published by the French Institute at 
Washington, and it is printed by Johns 
Hopkins Press on beautiful paper. It has 
an introduction by James Brown Scott. 
It is edited by Monsieur G. Chinard, a 
distinguished French scholar. 

The Peesident: Is it your idea that 
we should send a few copies of that to 
the French group? 

The Executive Seceetaey: Yes. 

Mr. Chindblom : Have we, as a group, 
done anything, even to the extent of send- 
ing a letter expressing our appreciation? 

The President: I have written my- 
self, personally. 

Mr. Chindblom : I mean as a group ? 

The President: No. 




Mr. Chindblom: Have we any funds 
at all? 

The Executive Secretary : We have 
$254.20 in the treasury. 

Mr. Howard: Mr. President, I move 
that the Executive Secretary secure the 
signatures of the delegates to this last con- 
ference on ten copies and send them. 

Mr. Bloom : I would like to make a 
suggestion. If we are going to do that — 
this is only a paper cover — why not have 
copies made and bound in more beauti- 
ful covers? We can have the same thing 
reproduced in leather with a beautiful 
binding and then present it to them. I 
think, if we are going to present a book 
it should not be a book in a paper cover. 

Mr. Howard: I take it for granted 
that that Secretary of ours so competent 
in all directions, will attend to those de- 

The President : You know in France 
there are a great many books — and I have 
been familiar with them since 1880 — that 
are put forth in paper bindings? 

Mr. Bloom : I mean, if we are going 
to present them with a book, to present 
them with a book like that in paper bind- 
ings might look rather cheap. 

The President : Cannot we leave that 
to the Secretary? 

Mr. Chindblom: I move that it be 
left to the Secretary, and the Chairman 
and First Vice Chairman, to obtain a suf- 
ficient number of copies of this book, and 
that we agree to underwrite the expense. 
I do not know whether we have money 
enough in the treasury or not. 

The President : We have. 

Mr. Britten : I agree with Mr. Bloom, 
that this ten or a dozen books should be 
well bound. 

Mr. Porter : I agree as to the binding, 
but we should not put a limit of ten on 
this. Whatever is necessary should be left 
to the Secretary. 

The President: The motion amounts 
practically to this, leave it to the Secre- 
tary, by communication with the Presi- 
dent of the French group to obtain from 
him the names of persons to whom a copy 
of the book should be sent, to provide for 
a proper binding and send. the copies witli 
the signatures. 

Mr. Bloom : With such signatures as 

he, in conference with the President and 
Vice President, shall determine. 

Mr. Howard : I second the motion. 

(The motion was put and unanimously 

Mr. Chindblom : I move that the group 
express its appreciation for his services 
during the past year, the very efficient 
and valuable services, of the President of 
the group, the Executive Secretary and 
the other officers, and that we tender them 
this appreciation for their services. 

Mr. Purnell : And in support of that, 
Mr. President, I want to say, as one of the 
very humble delegates last summer who 
sat and hstened and said nothing, that 
it was a real, genuine pleasure when the 
distinguished President of this group took 
the platform and spoke. 

Mr. Chindblom : It was not my pleas- 
ure to be there, but I know of the work 
of this group, and let me refer to the 
work of the Executive Secretary, I hope 
that the work to be done in connection 
with the Britten resolution will make it 
possible that we can find ourselves in a 
position to pay him a compensation for 
his work which will be commensurate with 
its value. If you are ready for the ques- 
tion, I will put it. 

Mr. Howard: Mr. President, speaking 
in my capacity as delegate, I want to en- 
dorse all that my colleague from Hoosier- 
dom has had to say. Over in Paris, had 
it not been for the guiding hand of the 
President of our group, I would have 
been lost every day in the maze of intri- 
cacies incident to conducting a conference 
in foreign languages ; and in all Paris, had 
it not been for the guiding influence of 
our Secretary, I had been hopelessly in- 
volved in a labyrinth of my own ignorance. 
So I am very grateful to both of them for 
the services rendered to me, and as I be- 
lieve, to my friends. 

Mr. Johnson : Might I just add this ? 
The distingished gentleman is indeed 
very modest. When I saw him in Paris — 
I happened to be a member of the Amer- 
ican group — he was speaking more French 
than a Frenchman, and, although I had 
been over there and thought I knew some 
French, he was my very guide. He told 
me where to go and what to see, and I 




considered him one of the most con- 
spicious members over there. Seriously, 
I enjoyed the meeting tremendously. It 
was a wonderful thing to me to rub el- 
bows with those boys over there, and to 
see what they see and get their ideas of 

Might I add just here that I am very 
much in favor of sending them something 
to show our appreciation, for, wnile vot- 
ing against us on every occasion, they cer- 
tainly gave us a wonderful time. 

The President: We have not heard 
from Senator Thomas, who is here today. 

Senator Thomas: I am very glad to 
be here, I am sure. 

The President: I believe that is all 
the business we have. The meeting stands 

(Whereupon, at 12 o'clock noon, the 
meeting adjourned.) 

(Signed) Arthur Deerin Call, 

Executive Secretary. 


THE relations between Great Britain 
and Egypt have entered upon a new 
phase of strain with the rejection by the 
Egyptian Government of the draft treaty 
between the two countries, negotiated by 
Prime Minister Sarwat Pasha. Immedi- 
ately after handing to the British High 
Commissioner, Lord Lloyd, a communi- 
cation containing the rejection, the prime 
minister resigned his office. The results 
of a long period of difficult and patient 
negotiations have thus been undone by 
one stroke of the pen, guided by the ex- 
treme elements of the Egyptian nation- 
alist movement. 

In connection with the announcement 
of the decision taken by the Cairo cabinet, 
the British Government issued the text 
of all the documents relating to the nego- 
tiations. Following is a summary of 
these documents. 

Sir Austen Chamberlain's Memorandum 

The first of the documents is a memo- 
randum, dated July 13, 1937, by the Sec- 
retary of State and Foreign Affairs, in 
which he describes the conversations he 
had had with Sarwat Pasha in London 

in regard to Anglo-Egyptian relations. 
Sir Austen Chamberlain's memorandum 
states : 

I said that I did not propose to enter into 
the details of the past, but his Excellency 
would, I thought, recollect that I had last 
year drawn his attention to the reservations 
which we had attached to the grant of Egyp- 
tian independence and to the obligations no 
Jess than the rights which those reservations 
Imposed upon us. The rights v^ere vital to 
us. No British government could afford to 
ignore them. My predecessor [Mr. Ramsay 
McDonald] had asserted them as plainly as 
I could do. They were, in fact, so essential 
to the existence of the British Empire that 
every British government in the future, as 
in the past, whatever its complexion, would 
be obliged to insist upon them. I was old 
enough to remember the circumstances of 
our intervention in Egypt in the early 
eighties. My father was a minister at that 
time. I could recall the sincerity with which 
the ministers of that day had declared that 
our occupation was only temporary and that 
it would be withdrawn at the earliest pos- 
sible moment. But circumstances had been 
too strong for us. The movement of with- 
drawal had never come and the events of the 
Intervening 40 or 50 years had shown that 
neither of us could escape from the situ- 
ation in which God had placed us or evade 
the mutual relations which that situation 
imposed upon us. 

But if this was the position in regard to 
our rights and interests, the obligations im- 
posed by the declaration to foreign powers 
with which we had accompanied the an- 
nouncement of Egyptian independence were 
not less imperative. We had warned foreign 
powers that we should treat as an unfriendly 
act any attack by them on the integrity of 
Egypt or any intervention on Egyptian soil. 

Sir Austen Chamberlain goes on to say 
that he is more interested in the future 
than in the past, and the real question 
is whether the Egyptian Government are 
going to collaborate heartily with the 
British Government or not. 

The fundamental requirements of British 
policy were common to all parties in the 
state, and a change of government made no 
alteration in them. In reply to Sir Austen 
Chamberlain, Sarwat Pasha said he entirely 
shared the secretary of state's view of the 




necessary connection between the two coun- 
tries and of the true interests of Egypt. . . . 
The Egyptian Parliament and public now 
recognized there must be friendly collabora- 
tion between us and that the aid of Great 
Britain was necessary to Egypt. They were 
well aware of the dangers which would 
menace them from other quarters if they 
stood alone. 

The question of the army was dis- 
cussed, and Sir Austen Chamberlain told 
Sarwat Pasha that so long as the British 
position was not frankly recognized by 
the Egyptian Government it was al- 
most unavoidable that any proposal by 
them to strengthen the army or the re- 
serves or to improve their equipment 
should be regarded by Great Britain, not 
as a measure of legitimate defense, but as 
a preparation for, or at least a threat of, 
opposition to Great Britain. "If," Sir 
Austen Chamberlain said, "we had an 
agreement — or an alliance, if he pleased — 
the whole situation would be changed. 
Our position would be recognized by 
Egypt and the interests of the two coun- 
tries in the defense of Egypt would be 
concordant. We could then co-operate 
whole-heartedly with the Egyptian Gov- 
ernment to make the army as efficient as 

The British Occupation 

The second document is a memoran- 
dum to Sir Austen Chamberlain by his 
private secretary, Mr. Selby, enclosing a 
draft treaty, communicated by Sarwat 
Pasha on July 18, 1927. Eeference was 
made in article 6 of the draft treaty to 
the British occupation, and Sarwat Pasha 
told Mr. Selby that some such clause was 
"essential if he was to secure acceptance 
of the treaty in Egypt." On July 28, 
1927, the counter-draft to the Egyptian 
draft treaty — the third of the documents 
— was approved by the British Govern- 
ment. Article 6 of the Egyptian draft 
was as follows: 

In order to facilitate and secure to Great 
Britain the protection of the lines of com- 
munication of the empire, the Egyptian 
Government authorize his Britannic Maj- 
esty's Government to maintain a military 
force upon Egyptian territory. The pres- 
ence of this force will in no way have the 
character of an occupation and will in no 

way prejudice the sovereign rights of 

This military force, after a period of — 
years, from the coming into force of the 
present treaty, will be quartered in . 

When Sarwat Pasha communicated the 
draft to Mr. Selby he said the preliminary 
period he had in view was some three to 
five years, after which the British forces 
should be stationed in the region of the 
canal, and he mentioned Port Tewfik as a 

On this point the British counter-draft 
— Article 5 — said: 

In order to facilitate the co-operation of 
the forces of the high contracting parties and 
to facilitate and secure to his Britannic 
Majesty the protection of the lines of com- 
munication of the British Empire, his Maj- 
esty the King of Egypt authorizes his Bri- 
tannic Majesty to maintain upon Egyptian 
territory such armed forces as his Britannic 
Majesty's Government consider necessary for 
the above purposes, and will at all times 
afford the necessary facilities for the main- 
tenance and training of the said forces. The 
presence of these forces shall not constitute 
in any manner an occupation and will in no 
way prejudice the sovereign rights of Egypt. 

After a period of ten years from the com- 
ing into force of the present treaty the high 
contracting parties will reconsider the ques- 
tion of the localities in which the said forces 
are to be stationed in the light of their ex- 
perience of the operation of the provisions 
of the treaty and of the military conditions 
then existing. 

Sarwat Pasha communicated his obser- 
vations on the proposed treaty to Mr. 
Selby at the British Embassy in Paris on 
August 31, 1927. In his memorandum — 
document 4 — to Sir Austen Chamberlain, 
Mr. Selby wrote that Sarwat Pasha de- 
clared that his observations were not to be 
regarded as in any way a final statement 
of his position. Sarwat Pasha, in his ob- 
servations, referred to the British draft 
as "vague." In regard to article 13 of 
that draft — which dealt with the Sudan — 
he observed : 

I was careful in my draft to avoid broach- 
ing the general question of the Sudan, in 
which the two governments do not see eye 
to eye. My object was to raise as few con- 




troversial points as possible, and I confined 
myself to touching upon certain concrete 
questions which require an urgent solution. 
In the British draft, on the contrary, the 
issue is raised squarely, and a solution is 
provided which accords with British policy 
on this matter. I do not see my way to fol- 
low the British Government in this. I prefer 
to leave the question for later negotiations. 

Later he declared, in regard to the po- 
sition of the Egyptian army under the 
proposed treaty, that "the limitation of 
the effectives of an army in an offensive- 
defensive alliance would be without prece- 
dent and absolutely without justification.^' 

Document 5 gives the text of a draft 
note drawn up in consultation with Sir 
John Maffey, Governor- General of the 
Sudan, and Mr. MacGregor, of the Sudan 
Government Office, in regard to irrigation 
in Egypt and the Sudan, which was de- 
sighed as a basis of an Anglo-Egyptian 
agreement on the subject. This draft 
note was communicated unofficially to 
Sarwat Pasha on November 4, 1927. 

Dispatch to Lord Lloyd 

In a dispatch, dated November 24, 1927 
— document 6 — to Lord Lloyd, British 
High Commissioner for Egypt and the Su- 
dan, Sir Austen Chamberlain referred to 
the "long and friendly exchange of views" 
with Sarwat Pasha, and wrote that, "sub- 
ject only to the settlement of a suitable 
text for the expression of the agreement 
on a minor point which Sarwat Pasha and 
I had already reached in principle, and to 
the concurrence of his Majesty's Govern- 
ments in the Dominions and India 
(which, as I had already explained to his 
Excellency, we considered necessary}, his 
Majesty's Government in Great Britain 
were prepared to accept the treaty as then 

I need not say that the treaty thus defi- 
nitely approved differs in many and im- 
portant respects from the draft which I had 
earlier offered to Sarwat Pasha on behalf 
of his Majesty's Government. It embodies 
large concessions to his Excellency's own 
views and to Egyptian sentiment, which, 
after hearing Sarwat Pasha's explanations, 
his Majesty's Government have felt it pos- 
sible to make in order to reach agreement. 

His Excellency was good enough to recog- 
nize fully on more than one occasion the 
friendly and sympathetic spirit in which his 
Majesty's Government had received and con- 
sidered his representations, and I gladly ac- 
knowledge that his Excellency brought a 
similar friendly spirit, largeness of outlook, 
and earnest desire for agreement to our 
common deliberations. 

In its present form the draft treaty must 
be regarded as expressing on the one side 
and the other the limit to which each party 
can advance in his wish to meet the other. 
It was so understood between us, and it was 
on this condition only that Sarwat Pasha 
no less than I could go thus far. It was 
common ground to us both that no further 
changes could be made and that the treaty 
must now be accepted or rejected as it 
stands. . . . 

I have now the pleasure to inform your 
Lordship that his Majesty's Government in 
Great Britain, after communication with his 
Majesty's Governments in the Dominions 
and India, accept the draft agreed upon be- 
tween us, of which a copy is attached to this 
dispatch, and that you are authorized to 
sign the treaty on behalf of his Majesty as 
soon as his Excellency is in a position to sign 
for the Egyptian Government. [The text of 
this draft treaty appears in the International 
Documents section of this issue of the Advo- 
cate OF Peace.] It is our earnest hope that 
by this treaty, equally honorable to both 
peoples, ensuring to Egypt her freedom and 
independence and her due place among the 
nations of the world, and to the British 
Empire protection for her vital interests and 
international obligations, we may have laid 
the secure foundation of future amity and 
concord between Egypt and the British 

I request that you will read this dispatch 
to Sarwat Pasha and leave a copy of it with 
his Excellency. 

Request for Delay 

Document 7 is a copy of a draft note 
on the subject of the reform of the Capit- 
ulations of Egypt, prepared after discus- 
sion between Sir Cecil Hurst and Sarwat 
Pasha, This is followed by a further 
dispatch, dated February 5, 1928, from 
Sir Austen Chamberlain to Lord Lloyd, 
in which the Secretary of State reviews 
the general course of the negotiations 
since his dispatch of November 24, 1927. 




He states that when it was suggested that 
the treaty should be signed and published 
on about December 20^ 1927, Sarwat 
Pasha "showed some surprise that so im- 
mediate action on his part should be sug- 
gested." Sarwat Pasha then said that his 
intention was to divulge the contents of 
the treaty and supplementary notes to 
his cabinet colleagues and to the Presi- 
dent of the Wafd. He later declared, 
however, that he could not lay the docu- 
ments before his colleagues until he had 
discussed with Lord Lloyd "certain im- 
portant issues which had not been cleared 
up in London.'^ In view of further delay 
which Sarwat Pasha urged, Sir Austen 
Chamberlain sent a message to him in 
which he wrote : 

Your Excellency will recollect that in the 
memorandum commenting on the first 
British counter-draft of the treaty, handed 
to Mr. Selby in Paris in August last, strong 
emphasis was laid on the importance of 
Great Britain relying less upon a cut-and- 
dried scheme of safeguards than upon the ■ 
sentiment of mutual confidence which the 
alliance would generate. This argument car- 
ried considerable weight with me, and, as 
your Excellency will admit, is reflected in 
the final text of the treaty. But now to sug- 
gest that his Majesty's Government should 
define in advance what would be their in- 
terpretation, in hypothetical circumstances, 
of particular provisions of the treaty, seems 
to me to be in conflict with the principle 
which your Excellency yourself invoked. If 
Great Britain should trust Egypt, Egypt 
should equally trust Great Britain. 

This was followed by a personal mes- 
sage from Sir Austen Chamberlain to 
Sarwat Pasha, in which he urged him 
"to place the treaty before your colleagues 
without delay, and to proceed, at the 
earliest possible moment, to its signa- 

British Misgivings 

In a further dispatch, dated March 1, 
1928, to Lord Lloyd, Sir Austen Cham- 
berlain summarized the course of the ne- 
gotiations up to that time. Then, in a 
second dispatch of the same date — docu- 
ment 10 of the papers — Sir Austen 
Chamberlain wrote to Lord Lloyd: 

In view of the fact that Sarwat Pasha 

had already communicated the text of the 
ti'eaty to Nahas Pasha before accompanying 
his Majesty King Fuad on his recent visit 
to Upper Egypt, I thought it essential that 
Nahas Pasha should be left under no illu- 
sion as to the serious nature of the decision 
which Egypt was called upon to make and 
which he, as leader of the numerically 
strongest group in the present Egyptian Par- 
liament, would largely influence. 

2. I accordingly authorized your Lordship 
to inform his Excellency that in the event 
of a rejection of the treaty his Majesty's 
government would have to consider how the 
enactment of certain projected legislation in 
the Egyptian Parliament would accord with 
their responsibilities under the Declaration 
of the 28th February, 1922, and to add that 
the wording of recent manifestos by students 
and the reported association with them of 
undesirable characters raised the question of 
the obligation imposed on his Majesty's 
government by that instrument for the pro- 
tection of foreigners. 

3. Your Lordship reported on the 27th 
February that in the course of your inter- 
view on the preceding day with Nahas 
Pasha, the latter had stated that he felt it 
useless to discuss what advantages might 
or might not be afforded to Egypt in various 
clauses of the treaty, inasmuch as the treaty 
clearly failed to provide for the complete 
evacuation of Egyptian territory by the 
British army. You added that on the ques- 
tion of the British army in Egypt he was 
entirely uncompromising and repeated him- 
self on this point again and again. 

4. Nahas Pasha, in fact, is as little ready 
as was Zaghlul Pasha in his conversations 
with my predecessor in 1924 to recognize the 
realities of the situation which Mr. Ramsay 
MacDonald defined in his dispatch to Lord 
Allenby : 

No British Government in the light of 
that experience (the European War) can 
divest itself wholly, even in favour of an 
ally, of its interest in guarding such a 
vital link in British communications (the 
Suez Canal). Such a security must be a 
feature of any agreement come to between 
our two governments, and I see no reason 
why accommodation is impossible, given 
good will. 

The effective co-operation of Great 
Britain and Egypt in protecting those com- 
munications might in my view have been 




ensured by the conclusion of a treaty of 
close alliance. The presence of a British 
force in Egypt provided for by such a 
treaty freely entered into by both parties 
on an equal footing would in no way be in- 
compatible with Egyptian independence, 
whilst it would be an indication of the 
specially close and intimate relations be- 
tween the two countries and their deter- 
mination to co-operate in a matter of vital 
concern to both. It is not the wish of his 
Majesty's government that this force 
should in any way interfere with the func- 
tions of the Egyptian Government or en- 
croach upon Egyptian sovereignty, and I 
emphatically said so. 

It was Sarwat Pasha's recognition of these 
realities which made it possible to negotiate 
the treaty with him; it is Nahas Pasha's 
refusal to recognize them which, if adopted 
by the Egyptian Government, will once 
again have made a settlement impossible. 
The fact that grossly inaccurate and mis- 
leading versions of the treaty are appearing 
in the Egyptian press makes it imperative 
that publication of the full text should not 
be further delayed. I shall, therefore, present 
the text of the treaty and the covering corre- 
spondence to Parliament in the immediate 
future, probably during the course of next 
week, and I request that your Lordship will 
inform Sarwat Pasha of this step. 

5. Unless, therefore, the final decision of 
the Egyptian Government, which your Lord- 
ship reported that Sarwat Pasha did not 
expect to be able to give before March 1, 
differs widely from the attitude adopted by 
the leader of the Wafd, the situation con- 
templated in the second paragraph of this 
dispatch will have arisen. In this event 
your Lordship should address an oflBcial note 
to the Egyptian Government in the follow- 
ing terms : 

His Majesty's government have for some 
time past viewed with misgiving certain 
legislative proposals introduced in the 
Egyptian Parliament which, if they were 
to become law, would be likely seriously to 
weaken the hands of the administrative 
authorities responsible for the mainte- 
nance of order and for the protection of 
life and property in Egypt. 

So long as there was any prospect of 
the early conclusion of a treaty of alli- 
ance between Great Britain and Egypt, 
which would define anew the responsibili- 

ties and rights of the two parties, his 
Majesty's government were content to re- 
frain from all comment in the expectation 
that they might rely with confidence on the 
Egyptian Government to avoid legislation 
which might make it impossible for the 
Egyptian administration to discharge suc- 
cessfully the increased responsibilities in- 
herent in the treaty regime. 

But now that conversations with the 
Egyptian Government have failed to 
achieve their object, his Majesty's govern- 
ment cannot permit the discharge of any 
of their responsibilities under the decla- 
ration of February 28, 1922, to be en- 
dangered whether by Egpytian legislation 
of the nature indicated above, or by ad- 
ministrative action, and they reserve the 
right to take such steps as in their view 
the situation may demand. 

Cairo Cabinet's Decision 

On March 1 Lord Lloyd telegraphed to 
Sir Austen Chamberlain : 

Prime Minister [Sarwat Pasha] called on 
me this evening to inform me that his gov- 
ernment were unable to sign the treaty and 
that news to this effect would be published 
in the papers tomorrow. The decision of the 
government was imposed upon it by the 
Wafd, which had unanimously rejected the 
treaty. He will let me have the text of the 
decision tomorrow. 

In reply Sir Austen Chamberlain tele- 
graphed on March 2 : 

Your telegram of yesterday. 

My second dispatch of March 1 now on 
its way to you was summarized in my tele- 
gram of the same date and foresaw and 
made provision for the situation which has 
arisen. You should read declaration quoted 
in my above-mentioned telegram and dis- 
patch to Sarwat Pasha and hand him a 
copy when he gives you the Egyptian reply. 

On March 4 Lord Lloyd telegraphed 
to Sir Austen Chamberlain : 

Sarwat Pasha came to see me this eve- 
ning to hand me reply of his cabinet, and to 
inform me that he had this afternoon 
tendered his resignation to the King. 

I handed him a copy of declaration con- 
tained in your telegram and dispatch of 
March 1. I am seeing King tomorrow morn- 




ing and will hand him a copy for the infor- 
mation of Sarwat's successor. 

My immediately following telegram con- 
tains text of Egyptian cabinet's reply. 

The following is the telegram contain- 
ing the text of the Egyptian cabinet's 
reply : 

Excellency — I have the honour to inform 
you that in accordance with the wish ex- 
pressed by his Excellency Sir Austen Cham- 
berlain in the message which he was so good 
as to address to me through you, I have sub- 
mitted to my colleagues draft treaty of 
alliance which resulted from our conver- 
sations last summer, at the same time ac- 
quainting them with different phases of these 
conversations as well as with the notes ex- 
changed and discussions carried on subse- 

My colleagues have reached the conclusion 
that draft, by reason both of its basic prin- 
ciples and of its actual provisions, is incom- 
patible with the independence and sover- 
eignty of Egypt and, moreover, that it 
legalizes occupation of the country by British 

My colleagues have accordingly charged 
me to inform his Britannic Majesty's Prin- 
cipal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs 
that they cannot accept this draft. 

I shall be grateful if your Excellency will 
be so good as to communicate the above 
to his Excellency Sir Austen Chamberlain 
and will at the same time repeat to him my 
most sincere thanks for the friendly spirit 
in which his Excellency began and carried 
on our conversations. 

I take this opportunity of thanking your 
Excellency also for the cordiality which you 
have shown in the course of our discussions 
regarding draft treaty and to renew, &c. 


ON FEBEUAEY 29, the Indian Legis- 
lative Assembly, sitting at Delhi, re- 
ceived from Sir Basil Blackett, the 
finance member, the budget estimates 
for the coming year. In the course of his 
speech, introducing the new budget, Sir 
Basil Blackett reviewed the financial year 
1927-28. He called attention to the fact 
that the visible balance of trade in the 
first ten months was in India's favor by 

1,019 lakhs more than last year. Both 
imports and exports of merchandise had 
increased in value by 8 per cent, while net 
imports of treasure had diminished by 
6V2 crores.^ Except for raw cotton, all 
the principal articles had contributed to 
the increase. Prices were stable and trade 
figures reflected the advantages of stabili- 
zation of the rupee. The remarkable 
improvement in railway earnings enabled 
important reductions to be made in rail- 
way charges and would give new stimulus 
towards business and agricultural pros- 
perity. There were also indications that 
Indian commerce had made steady ad- 
vance, and the effects of the post-War 
trade depression were being dissipated. 
With regard to the budget, he pointed 
out that the military expenditures re- 
mained unchanged, the savings due to 
troops being sent to China having been 
used for urgent expenditure on moderni- 
zation. The net result was that the total 
expenditure stood at 12,774 lakhs, and the 
total revenue at the same figure, includ- 
ing the transfer of 169 lakhs from the 
revenue reserve fund instead of the 172 

lakhs originally estimated. 

Capital Expenditures and Debts 

Sir Basil next dealt with the capital 
expenditures of the government and with 
its borrowing and general debt position. 
In 1927-28 the Indian Government had to 
meet a railway capital outlay of 30 crores, 
other capital outlay of 2 crores, and debt 
payments of 33% crores. For this they 
had raised rupee and sterling loans, and 
obtained means from other sources. 

In 1928-29 the railway capital outlay 
would be 28 crores, including 4 crores for 
the purchase of the Burma railways. 
There would be other outlay of 4^/2 crores, 
provincial demands would amount to 7 
crores, and the net discharge of debt 19 
crores. Cash balances could not be re- 
duced by more than 2 crores, and taking 
other receipts into account a loan of 32 
crores would be necessary, including 13 
crores of new money. 

Referring to borrowing operations in 
the current year. Sir Basil Blackett said : 

* The currency of India is as follows : One 
rupee is about 35 cents; 100,000 nipees con- 
stitute one lakh ; 100 lakhs are equal to one 




The reintroduction of treasury bills in 
India was in full accordance with our plans, 
as we deliberately desired to improve the 
financial facilities of the Indian money mar- 
ket and check seasonal fluctuations in the 
market for government securities by this 
means. We found it necessary in addition to 
resort to external borrowing, first by raising 
sterling bills to the extent of 5,000,000 ster- 
ling in England in July last, which have 
since been repaid, and later by the issue of 
a sterling loan of 7,500,000 sterling about 
a month ago. Even so the net cash receipts 
from the rupee and sterling loans aggregated 
only 27% crores, which was only about 2 
crores more than the net amount of debt 
discharged, and as much as 13 crores less 
than the amount required for railways and 
other capital outlay, including that of pro- 
vincial governments. The total local remit- 
tances would be 30,750,000 sterling for the 
current year, including 28,500,000 sterling 
through the market, and 36,000,000 sterling 
next year. 

The finance member then quoted the 
debt statistics, which showed that the in- 
crease in the external indebtedness of the 
government in 1937-38 was considerably- 
less than the amount of the sterling loan, 
and that in the five years since March 
31, 1933, the productive debt had in- 
creased by 189 crores and the unproduc- 
tive debt diminished by 76 crores. By the 
end of next year the debt due to the five 
years of revenue deficits, from 1918-19 to 
1933-33, would be just about liquidated, 
and at the recent rate of progress the un- 
productive debt would vanish in 13 years. 

Next Year's Budget 

Turning to next year, the finance 
member said he expected a net customs 
revenue of 5,018 lakhs, after allowing for 
a further fall of 40 lakhs on machinery. 
Taxes on income would yield 17 crores 
and salt 7 crores. The opium policy 
would involve a net loss of 35 lakhs, and 
the railway contribution would be 548 
lakhs only. 

Military expenditure was 5,510 lakhs, 
including 10 lakhs for expanding the ter- 
ritorial force. The government, after 
careful consideration, had concluded that 
the figure could not be reduced if India 
was to make reasonable provision for de- 
fense in modern conditions. 

After allowing for 81 lakhs for the 
premium on bonds maturing next year, 
and 25 lakhs additional provision for the 
bonus on cash certificates, the debt serv- 
ices still showed a saving of 67 lakhs. This 
was the result of the general debt and 
debt redemption policy. In the five years 
ending 1938-39 the saving in interest on 
the deadweight debt was more than three 
and a half times the increase in the pro- 
vision for debt redemption, and over a 
crore more than the actual provision on 
this account next year. 

Civil administration showed a rise of 
41 lakhs, and included a number of items 
relating to beneficial services. The ex- 
penditure of the Indian Posts and Tele- 
graphs Department included over 14 
lakhs for further improvement of the con- 
ditions of service of the lower paid staff. 
The department showed a surplus of less 
than a quarter of a lakh, which justified 
no reduction in postal and telegraph 

Revenue and Expenditure for 1928-29 

The total revenue for next year was 
13,333 lakhs, the expenditure 13,960 
lakhs, and the surplus 363 lakhs, allowing 
for the recovery of the unextinguished 
balance of provincial contributions. But 
the liability for the bonus on cash certifi- 
cates was accumulating, and was esti- 
mated at 3% crores on October 1, 1937. 
As soon as finances permitted provision 
from revenue, over and above that for 
actual payments, would be necessary to 
form a separate fund to enable the in- 
creasing liability to be met, but the sur- 
plus now disclosed could be treated as re- 
current, seeing that the budget included a 
special item of 81 lakhs for the premium 
on bonds, and that there should be further 
savings in interest and more revenue from 
taxes on income. Even customs should 
improve, though it would be in the inter- 
ests of India's trade and industry to re- 
duce the general revenue tariff when 
finances permitted. 

On the whole, government proposed 
that, having regard to past commitments, 
358 lakhs of surplus should be utilized 
for the complete and final extinction of 
provincial contributions, leaving a small 
balance of 5 lakhs in the budget. 




Sir Basil Blackett concluded as follows : 

It is not a spectacular budget. After the 
budget of 1927-28, and tbe railway budget 
for 1928-29, with its large reductions in 
passenger fares and in freights, it might al- 
most be called an anti-climax. It imposes no 
new taxation, and though it allows for re- 
ductions in tbe customs tariff to tbe tune of 
nearly a crore, these reductions were an- 
nounced six months ago. What this budget 
does is to provide a surplus, in spite of the 
reduction in the customs tariff, sufficient 
finally to extinguish the provincial contri- 


THE question of the treatment by 
Italy of the Austrian minority in the 
Tyrol has again been brought to the at- 
tention of the world by its discussion in 
both countries concerned. The Austrians, 
especially in the Austrian Tyrol, are 
greatly agitated by what they regard as 
the oppression of their countrymen on 
the other side of the Italian frontier. 
Speeches on the subject have been made 
in the Tyrolese Diet, in the Parliament at 
Vienna, and in the Chamber of Deputies 
at Rome. 

Austrian Resentment Against Italy 

The debate in the Tyrolese Diet took 
place on February 9, and was of so violent 
a character that Signor Mussolini re- 
quested the Vienna Foreign Office for a 
verbatim report of the speeches. The 
debate followed the receipt of news from 
South (Italian) Tyrol of further alleged 
provocation of the people by the authori- 
ties, and the Diet adopted a resolution ap- 
pealing to the Chancellor, Dr. Seipel, to 
consider ways and means of drawing the 
attention of Europe or, as an alternative, 
of the League of Nations to the condition 
of the German subjects of Italy. Nat- 
urally, the speeches made at a session 
which framed such an appeal were not of 
the calmest character. As a matter of 
fact, in the same session a resolution was 
moved to strike a souvenir war medal to 
form a lasting link between Northern and 
Southern Tyrol and "be a perpetual re- 
minder of Italy's acts of injustice towards 

The question came up before the Vienna 
Parliament two weeks later and occa- 
sioned a lively debate, in the course of 
which Dr. Kolb, representing the Tyrolese^ 
declared that the treatment of Austro- 
Germans who had become minorities in 
several countries is worst in Italy. Dr. 
Kolb remarked that, though Austria is 
aware she has no jurisdiction beyond her 
frontiers, there is such a thing as natural 
human rights, and these compel a man to 
go to the aid of a brother whom he sees 
tortured, even if the torture is taking 
place in a neighboring field. The Ger- 
mans in South Tyrol are, he said, law- 
abiding, but their loyalty cannot be ex- 
pected to come from the heart. The 
speech was warmly cheered by the whole 
House, and the President spoke of the 
scene as an impressive and solemn demon- 
stration in the face of the whole world. 

In his reply Dr. Seipel pointed out that 
Austria can go to no forum to have her 
wrongs redressed. He said no such prob- 
lem has arisen for Austria on her other 
frontiers. It is a problem regarding 
which Austria cannot remain silent, as it 
goes too near Austrian hearts. He asked 
Italy to take this into consideration; he 
is not interfering in internal Italian af- 
fairs, but he would appeal to an interna- 
tional sense of morality. 

Mussolini's Reply and Warning 

In reply to these discussions in Austria, 
Premier Mussolini devoted a long speech, 
on March 3, to a discussion of the Tyrol 
question. The Italian Chamber received 
his speech with great enthusiasm, and his 
closing words, in which he declared that 
"we make known to the Tyrolese, to the 
Austrians, and to the whole world, that 
on the Brenner there stands, with her liv- 
ing sons and with her dead, united Italy/* 
were drowned in a prolonged storm of 

Signor Mussolini began his speech by 
declaring that there was no Hannibal at 
the gate, nor even Mgr. Seipel (the Aus- 
trian Chancellor). He had at first hesi- 
tated whether to reply at all to the 
speeches in the Austrian Parliament, but 
had been compelled to do so by the inter- 
vention in the debate of the Austrian 
Chancellor, in many respects an eminent 




man. However, he hastened to add, 
"This is the last occasion upon which I 
shall speak on this subject. The next 
time acts will take the place of words." 
Signor Mussolini then went on to the 
main theme of his speech, which was de- 
signed to prove that the Austrian com- 
plaints were not only not justified, but 
were also provocative. If he now cited 
examples of generosity towards Austria 
he did so in order that the world at large 
might once for all know the true facts. 

Italy's Friendly Acts to Austria 

As a first example he quoted the action 
of Italy in retaining her troops in the 
Klagenfurt area in 1920 at a moment 
when the Austrians feared lest the arrival 
of Yugoslav troops near the frontier 
might influence the coming plebiscite, and 
he read out the thanks of Dr. Eenner, the 
then Austrian Chancellor. A year later 
came the Burgenland dispute with Hun- 
gary, and after the agreement reached at 
Venice, Herr Schober, at that time Aus- 
trian Chancellor, expressed thanks to 
Italy. This friendly attitude had been 
consistently maintained by the Fascist 
Government, and only a fortnight ago the 
Austrian Minister in Eome had presented, 
on behalf of Mgr. Seipel, an expression of 
gratitude for the extremely favorable at- 
titude of Italy in the question of military 
control and the new reconstruction loan. 
"It is possible that in the interval of time 
necessary for the completion of the new 
Austrian loan Italy may temporarily 
withhold her indispensable definite ad- 

Signor Mussolini proceeded to deny the 
existence of any international aspects of 
the Upper Adige question, which was not 
referred to in the Peace Treaty or dip- 
lomatic instruments. The Austrians 
claimed that certain promises and as- 
surances had been given by pre-Fascist 
governments. That might be. *TBut it 
is possible that those who made these 
statements have repented later in view of 
the arrogant interpretation of certain 
promises." In any case, the Fascist Gov- 
ernment would not necessarily feel bound 
to observe all these vague and verbal as- 
surances given by men representing sys- 
tems and governments which the Fascist 
Eevolution had superseded. 

Fascist Tyranny Denied 

Signor Mussohni rejected in strong 
terms the charges of Fascist tyranny, and 
declared that Italy was not the pupil of 
an Austria "which for a century had filled 
the territories of half Europe with exe- 
cutioners, filled the prisons with martyrs, 
and set up gallows without any interrup- 
tion." The absurdity of such charges 
was proved by the existence of 15 news- 
papers printed in German, but Signor 
Mussolini gave definite warning that they 
would be suppressed unless the campaign 
of calumny ceased. Further, there were 
still 1,040 non-Italian speaking officials 
in the Province of Bolzano [the Upper 
Adige]. As this was not appreciated, 
these men would be made to choose be- 
tween either a transfer to another part 
of Italy or else dismissal from the service. 

Signor Mussolini went on to argue that 
much of the agitation was purely arti- 
ficial and that the general population was 
happy to live under Italy and the Fascist 
regime. The government had spent vast 
sums of money in various enterprises 
undertaken for the purpose of improving 
the moral and material welfare of the peo- 
ple. The shrieks from the Germans must 
be regarded as a proof that they realized 
that the game had been lost. 

An appeal to Geneva, he said, is out of 
the question, since if once the problem 
of minorities were raised the League of 
Nations would never come to the end of 
it and the plaintiff of today would become 
the defendant of tomorrow. It is time to 
declare that insolent speeches, odious in- 
sinuations, and vulgar insults have only 
one result — namely, to make the Fascists 
put on the screw still more firmly and to 
drive a wedge between neighboring peo- 
ples. Italy wishes to remain on good 
terms with the German people on con- 
dition that her security is in no way 

Reactions in Austria and Germany 

In commenting upon Signor Musso- 
lini's speech, the Austrian press points out 
that the Germans in South Tyrol would 
be happy if they enjoyed the treatment of 
which the Italian subjects of Austria- 
Hungary could boast when the situation 




was reversed for Italy. All the threats 
of Signor Mussolini that he will on the 
next occasion reply to Austrian com- 
plaints by acts, not words, and will delay 
the realization of Austria's efforts for a 
new international loan, are declared to 
be arguments of strength, though not 
strong arguments for the purpose of 
silencing the complaints of those who are 
anxious about the spiritual and cultural 
fate of their kin beyond the Austrian 
frontier. It is hoped that Signor Musso- 
lini may deceive nobody by his claim that 
the Upper Adige enjoys the same privi- 
leges and bears the same burdens as the 
rest of the 91 provinces, because the prime 
minister in the same breath expresses con- 
fidence that none but confessed Italian 
subjects will be there in a few years' time. 

The speech has produced a very un- 
pleasant impression in Germany. The 
German press points out the tactlessness 
of the speech from the international point 
of view. It is suggested that the repudi- 
ation of the promises made by the prede- 
cessors of the Fascist Government cannot 
fail to weaken international belief in 
Italian good faith. Hitherto, remarks the 
Deutsche Tageszeitung, it has been cus- 
tomary in civilized countries to attach im- 
portance to the fulfillment in all circum- 
stances of solemn obligations such as those 
undertaken in this case by former Italian 
governments, and by the king himself in 
the name of the Italian people, with re- 
spect to the German-speaking population 
of South Tyrol. "The manner in which 
Mussolini now declares all such assurances 
invalid must further weaken confidence 
in Italy's word and promises throughout 
the world." The same newspaper sug- 
gests that Signor Mussolini's threat to 
make the South Tyrolese themselves pay 
for any further demonstrations beyond 
the Brenner frontier is evidence of the 
fact that, in spite of his big words, he is 
not indifferent to the truth about the con- 
ditions in South Tyrol becoming known 
to the rest of the world. 

In most of the comments it is pointed 
out ironically that Signor Mussolini con- 
siders himself justified in crushing the 
population of an area gained, not by 
Italian arms, but through the military 
successes of other countries. Particular 
attention is paid to his statement that 
Italy wishes to remain in friendly rela- 

tions with the German-speaking countries 
as long as the Brenner frontier is left 
alone. No other frontier established by 
the Peace of 1919, it is argued, has been 
accepted by the German-speaking coun- 
tries with more resignation. 


ON March 3 a new Franco-Spanish 
agreement regarding the administra- 
tion of the Tangier zone was signed in 
Paris. The negotiations which have re- 
sulted in the new agreement have been in 
progress for over eighteen months. In 
November, 1926, it was agreed between 
the governments of Paris, Madrid, Lon- 
don, and Eome that the question of 
changes in the existing administrative 
system in the Tangier zone should be left, 
in its initial stages, to France and Spain. 
After agreement had been reached be- 
tween these two powers, London and Eome 
were to be promptly notified. 

The following is an official summary 
of the agreement reached by France and 
Spain : 

The agreement respects the sovereignty 
of the Sultan of Morocco and does not 
break through the framework of the 
Statute of 1923. It does not interfere 
with the rights of the legislative and ad- 
ministrative authorities established by 
that statute. 

The agreement applies for the duration 
of the existing statute, but its provisions 
will be subject to revision if any unex- 
pected difficulties should arise. 

The agreement provides for a modifica- 
tion of the various articles of the statute 
and of the penal code, designed more ef- 
fectively to suppress contraband in arms 
and action against public order in Mo- 

A Spanish officer is to be nominated as 
Inspector-General of Police, and a French 
assistant will be appointed to his staff. 
The duties of the Inspector-General will 
not enable him to intervene in the admin- 
istration of Tangier, but will qualify him 
to advise the authorities on questions 
connected with the neutrality and security 
of the neutral zone, and with the dis- 




solution of the existing police organiza- 
tion and the establishment of the police 
forces provided for in the statute. The 
police forces will be temporarily strength- 

The text of the agreement has been 
communicated to the British and Italian 
governments, which have been invited to 
send representatives to take part in the 
subsequent negotiations. A meeting will 
be held shortly in Paris to examine the 
Franco-Spanish proposals and the part 
which Italy would be willing to take in 
the Tangier administration. When an 
agreement has been reached between the 
British, French, Spanish, and Italian 
governments it will be submitted to the 
other powers for their approval. The 
present agreement is merely the prelude 
to the larger negotiations on the Tangier 
administration as a whole. 

A reminder that the United States is 
a party to the Act of Algeciras and in- 
sists upon the open door in Morocco was 
transmitted to the governments of Great 
Britain, France, and Spain, on March 16, 
by the American ambassadors in the cap- 
itals of those countries. 

An announcement made by the De- 
partment of State on March 16 follows in 
full text : 

The American ambassadors in Paris, 
London, Madrid, and Eome have been in- 
structed to present the following mem- 
orandum to the respective foreign offices 
today : 

"The Government of the United States has 
been interested to learn that representatives 
of the French, Spanish, British, and Italian 
governments will shortly meet in Paris to 
discuss Moroccan affairs with a view to 
reaching an agreement as to the future ad- 
ministration of Tangier. 

"It will be recalled that prior to a sim- 
ilar conference held in the autumn of 1923 
by the French, Spanish, and British gov- 
ernments, this government took occasion to 
remind the conferring powers of its position 
as a party to the Act of Algeciras, and that 
it stated that while it had no political in- 
terest in Morocco, it had a fundamental in- 
terest in the maintenance of the open door 
and in the protection of the life, liberty, and 
property of its citizens in Morocco. It fur- 
ther indicated that it presumed that nothing 
would be done by the conferring powers to 

interfere with the principle of the open door 
or with the rights and interests of the United 

"The views of the United States regarding 
Tangier which were further set forth in its 
correspondence with the French, Spanish, and 
British governments regarding the possibility 
of its adherence to the Statute of Tangier, 
remain unaltered. The Government of the 
United States would accordingly advise the 
powers now about to confer that it makes 
full reservation of its position on any deci- 
sions taken by the conference which may in 
any way affect or touch upon its rights and 
interests in Morocco and in Tangier." 


DUPING the month of February, 
the Yugoslav Government passed 
through another of its periodic crises. 
The trouble began on February 8, when 
the second Vukitchevitch Cabinet re- 
signed, and lasted until February 23, 
when Premier Vukitchevitch succeeded in 
forming his third Cabinet. The new gov- 
ernment represents both the Radical and 
the Democratic parties, which were forced 
into a coalition as a result of a violent 
agitation conducted by Stephan Eaditch, 
the Croatian Peasant Party leader, in 
favor of a government headed by a non- 
party General. As a reply to this demand 
for a military premiership, the two prin- 
cipal factions of the Democratic Party 
united with the Radicals to form a par- 
liamentary government. 

The new Cabinet is made up as follows : 
M. Velya Vukitchevitch (Radical), 
Prime Minister; Dr. Marinkovitch (Dem- 
ocrat), Foreign Affairs; Father Anton 
Koroshetz (Slovene Clerical), Interior; 
M. Vlada Andritch (Radical), Agrarian 
Reform; M. Milorai Vuitchitch (Radi- 
cal), Justice; Dr. Milan Groll (Demo- 
crat), Education; M. Vlayko Kostich 
(Radical), Posts and Telegraphs; M. 
Chedo Radovitch (Radical), Social Re- 
form; M. Bogdan Markovitch (Radical), 
Finance; Dr. Mehmed Spaho (Bosniak), 
Commerce; M. Velimir Popovitch (Radi- 
cal), Public Health; M. Svetozar Stanko- 
vitch (Radical), Agriculture; M. Milan 
Simonovitch (Radical), Public Worship; 
M. Petar Markovitch (Democrat), Public 
Works; M. Atza Miyevitch (Democrat), 




Mines and Forests; M. Ilia Shumenko- 
viteh (Democrat), Unification of Laws; 
General Milosavlyevitch (no party), Com- 
munications; General Hadjitch (no 
party). War. 

The Skupshtina (Parliament) met on 
February 29, and on March 3 M. Pri- 
bitchevitch, the leader of the Dissident 
Democrats, who are in opposition to the 
present government, read the official state- 
ment of the Croat Peasant and the Dis- 
sident Democrat groups, in which there 
was included a threat to leave the Skupsh- 
tina and refuse to accept the budget in 
Croat districts unless a change were made 
in the present state of affairs. 

M. Eaditch, the Croat Peasant leader, 
who has been temporarily suspended from 
the Skupshtina, explained later to the 
press that the Croat Peasants intended to 
try to force the formation of a cabinet 
with a non-political general as Prime 
Minister at the earliest opportunity. 
From these utterances, and the whole 
character of M. Raditch's activities, it 
seems certain that he has assured him- 
self of the support of those interests out- 
side Parliament which also aim at the 
formation of a cabinet under military 
leadership. His immediate object is to 
make normal parliamentary work impos- 
sible under the present cabinet and thus 
provoke a fresh crisis, which might open 
the way for the accession of a general to 
office. He is supported in these inten- 
tions by the Centralist section of the 
Radical Party, led by Dr. Sershkitch and 
M. Bozha Maximovitch, who have not been 
in office since M. Vukitchevitch succeeded 
M. Ouzounovitch as Prime Minister in 
April, 1927, and are closely allied with the 
military group. 

The general feeling in Yugoslavia is 
that the new cabinet is not likely to last 
long. It is threatened both by the op- 
position and by internal friction among 
the groups composing it. 

time of the dissolution of the Diet in Jan- 
uary, has not succeeded in bettering its 
situation. It came into power in April, 
1927, following the overthrow of the Min- 
seito government during the banking 
crisis. Representing the Seiyukai Party, 
it did not command a majority in the Diet 
and escaped earlier defeat by not conven- 
ing the Diet. Its very first encounter 
with the Diet on January 21, 1928, showed 
the untenability of its position and led 
Baron Tanaka, the Prime Minister, to 
request for the dissolution of the Parlia- 

Election Returns 

The elections resulted in giving the 
Seiyukai (government) and the Minseito 
(opposition) party an almost equal num- 
ber of seats. The position of the parties 
in the new Diet is as follows: 


ON February 20 Japan held her first 
parliamentary elections under full 
manhood suffrage. The government of 
Baron Tanaka, which held office at the 

Seiyukai 216 Labor 8 

Minseito 215 Kaliushin (for- 

Independents ... 14 mer Shinsei) . . 4 
Business Men 4 

The opposition relies on the support of 
Labor, the Kakushin, and six Independ- 
ents, giving it a total of 233. Its gains 
are already five more than its organizers 
expected, and it may still outnumber the 

Labor's eight members but poorly rep- 
resent the total votes cast for its candi- 
dates. In several constituencies Labor 
candidates were opposed to each other; 
in others Labor polled heavily, though un- 
successfully. Six of the eight Labor 
members belong to the Right Wing, and 
five are graduates of the Imperial Uni- 

A New Electorate 

The most interesting feature of the 
elections has been the fact that the parties 
have had to face what is practically a 
new electorate. For over a generation 
there had been a movement in Japan to 
secure universal manhood suffrage. This 
movement developed slowly, until the 
Manhood Suffrage Bill was passed in 
May, 1925. At a stroke it added 8,000,- 
000 voters to the electorate and enabled 
Labor to organize politically for the first 
time. It is true that subsequent legisla- 




tion has put an effective brake on the 
activities of ardent Labor men, but at the 
same time the movement towards demo- 
cratic representation effected by the pass- 
ing of the bill has been significant and 
unmistakable. In the election of 1924 

only 3,000,000 males out of a total pop- 
ulation of 60,000,000 persons were en- 
titled to vote. 

To be entitled to a vote, a Japanese 
must be a male citizen, 35 years of age, 
and self-supporting. 



Secretary of State of the United States 

IT HAS been my privilege during the 
past few months to conduct on behalf 
of the Government of the United States 
negotiations having for their object the 
promotion of the great ideal of world 
peace. Popular and governmental inter- 
est in the realization of this ideal has 
never been greater than at the present 
time. Ever since the World War, which 
spelled death to so many millions of men, 
spread desolation over so much of the 
Continent of Europe, and shocked and 
imperiled neutral as well as belligerent 
nations, the minds of statesmen and of 
their peoples have been more and more 
concerned with plans for preventing the 
recurrence of such a calamity. Not only 
has the League of Nations been preoccu- 
pied with studies of security and world 
peace, but members of the League of Na- 
tions have concluded additional special 
treaties like those signed at Locarno in 
1925, and recently at Habana, the United 
States and twenty other American States, 
including seventeen members of the 
League of Nations, expressed by formal 
declaration their unqualified condemna- 
tion of war as an instrument of national 
policy, and agreed to call a conference 
to draft appropriate treaties of compul- 
sory arbitration. 

Our New Arbitration Treaty 

The Government of the United States 
will never be a laggard in any effective 
movement for the advancement of world 
peace, and the negotiations which I have 
recently been carrying on have grown out 
of this government's earnest desire to pro- 
mote that ideal. They have had a dual 

character, having been concerned in part 
with the framing of new arbitration 
treaties to replace the so-called Eoot 
treaties, several of which expire by limi- 
tation this year, and in part with the 
anti-war treaty which M. Briand proposed 
to me last summer. 

In the first place, it should be clearly 
understood that the treaty of arbitration 
which was signed last month with France 
has no relation whatsoever to the proposal 
submitted by M. Briand for a treaty de- 
claring against war and renouncing it as 
an instrument of national policy. It is 
true that the preamble to the arbitration 
treaty recites that France and the United 
States are "eager by their example not 
only to demonstrate their condemnation 
of war as an instrument of national policy 
in their mutual relations, but also to 
hasten the time when the perfection of 
international arrangements for the pacific 
settlement of international disputes shall 
have eliminated forever the possibility of 
war among any of the powers of the 
world;" but a preamble is not a binding 
part of a treaty. If war is to be abolished, 
it must be through the conclusion of a 
specific treaty solemnly binding the par- 
ties not to resort to war with one another. 
It cannot be abolished by a mere declara- 
tion in the preamble of a treaty. Even 
though without legal effect, however, a 
formal expression of the peaceful aspira- 
tions of the governments and their com- 
mon desire to perfect a mechanism for the 
pacific settlement of justiciable disputes, 
such as that found in the preamble of the 

♦From an address before the Council on 
Foreign Relations, at New York City, Marcti 
15, 1928. 




arbitration treaty, is, I believe, very help- 
ful, since it publicly defines the positions 
of the two governments in a matter the 
importance of which is hard to exagger- 

The arbitration treaty itself I regard 
as a distinct advance over any of its 
predecessors, and I hope it can serve as a 
model for use in negotiations with other 
governments with which we have no pres- 
ent arbitration treaty or where the exist- 
ing Root treaties shortly expire. I have 
already instituted negotiations with the 
British and Japanese governments on the 
basis of the draft treaty which I sub- 
mitted to France last December, and I 
have indicated to all inquiring govern- 
ments that I shall be pleased to conclude 
with them new treaties similar to that 
recently signed with France. If a com- 
prehensive series of such bilateral treaties 
can be put into effect between the United 
States and the other nations of the world, 
I feel that very effective mechanism for 
the pacific settlement of justiciable dis- 
putes will have been established. I attach 
such importance